.44 Magnum and .454 Casull

[Southern Shooter]

If you have a .44 Magnum and a .454 Casull, both with 4" barrels, both weighing about the same...ballpark 43 ounces, both shooting the same weight cast lead bullet of 240 grains, and both shooting these 240 grain bullets at 1,200 FPS:

Which revolver would kick the hardest? How would the recoils of each gun compare to the other?

Thanks

[g.willikers]

In theory, there shouldn't be any difference.
But other things come into play, like grip thickness and angle, trigger reach, for example.

[black mamba]

A 240 grainer at 1200 doesn't kick much at all, get whichever one you prefer. I'd bet dollars to donuts the 44 mag would be more accurate.

[feets]

Physics will give you a headache but chances are good that the shooter would never feel a difference.
The 454 gun would weigh a wee tiny bit less and likely have more powder burning due to case volume. Those two things add up to more recoil but you probably won't feel it.

Why use the 454? I regularly exceed that level in my 45 Colts.

Don't start on accuracy. That's all up to the shooter. However, the 429 would have a flatter trajectory assuming similar bullet profiles.

[rclark]

Well, if you remember your physics class in high school or college .... recoil will be the same. As said above, if different gun then it may be perceived differently depending : "...other things come into play, like grip thickness and angle, trigger reach, etc". Now change velocity, or change bullet weight, and yes they will be different.

[Mike / Tx]

Do you have one or the other already? If not which are you REALLY looking the hardest at, and what is your main goal for it?

To be honest the recoil is going to roughly the same other than the itmes already stated by g.willikers above.

I have a Ruger Redhawk in both 44 and 45 Colt 7 1/2" barrels, as well as one of the Taurus Raging Bulls with an 8 3/8" barrel on it. That said, loading them all to the same velocities, but using slightly heavier 250gr bullets, my perception is that the 45 Colt recoil feels like the most. I don't know why with the Redhawk's, I certainly know why with the Bull. Heck it weighs a bunch. LOL

Then again recoil doesn't mess with me much anyway, so it will depend more on you, and how you perceive it. In general though it shouldn't be much to deal with.

[Southern Shooter]

If the bullet weights were increased to both being 320 grain cast lead and everything else also kept equal including the velocities of 1,200 FPS...Would one start to notice a difference in the recoil, then?

[Doyle]

If the bullet weights were increased to both being 320 grain cast lead and everything else also kept equal including the velocities of 1,200 FPS...Would one start to notice a difference in the recoil, then?

Nope. Remember the physics lesson - every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The force required to push ANY same sized bullet at the same velocity out of those essentially equal guns will result in the same opposite reaction. You'll only notice a recoil difference when you change a variable in one gun but not the other.

[Nanuk]

Ah, but grasshopper, the 45 would have lower pressure than the 44 with the same projectile @ the same velocity, thus it should recoil a little less.

[JohnKSa]

Assuming the absence of things like muzzle brakes or barrel porting, free recoil or recoil velocity is based exclusively on the momentum of the ejecta and the mass of the firearm in question.

The ejecta is everything that exits the muzzle (unburned powder, combustion gases & bullet). Momentum is mass times velocity.

So (again excluding things like muzzle brakes and porting), if you have two similar firearms of the same weight shooting the same weight bullet at the same velocity, you will have the same free recoil unless there's a significant difference in the amount or velocity of the unburned powder and/or combustion gases.

Pressure may change the character/feel of the recoil, but it doesn't change the actual free recoil/recoil velocity value unless it significantly changes the velocity of the ejecta other than the bullet.

[Magnum Wheel Man]

IMO... In theory, they should be very close...

however, actually I'd think the 44 would kick more, because if the bullets were the same weight, & cartridges loaded to the same pressures, there would be more bullet in contact with the barrel on the .429" bullet than on the .452" bullet of equal weights... imparting more force to the gun

& BTW... the 454 revolver would have to have weight added to it, because the difference between the 2 cartridges is actually very measurable, & there were be a fair amount of difference in the weight of the barrels & cylinders... where the weight was added to the 454 would matter... if the barrel profile & cylinder profiles were increased, it would be closer to Apples to Apples, but the frame wouldn't likely be the same weight to accommodate the bigger barrel & cylinder...

[Doyle]

Ah, but grasshopper, the 45 would have lower pressure than the 44 with the same projectile @ the same velocity, thus it should recoil a little less.

Only enough to be measured by the most delicate of machines - certainly not enough for a shooter to notice.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by nanuk

Ah, but grasshopper, the 45 would have lower pressure than the 44 with the same projectile @ the same velocity, thus it should recoil a little less.

I take it that you believe that my old Schaum's Mechanical Engineering Handbbok is incorrect by not including the pressure in the recoil example problem 20.30?

(Hint: As JohnKSA stated, pressure is an INTERNAL force and has no effect on recoil except for the minuscule effect of the velocity of the gas/powder ejecta)

[WESHOOT2]

I was talking with a buddy about my (now-gone) 5.5" Redhawk collection, one in each chambering.

I found the 41 'felt' stiffer than the 44, and the 44 'felt' stiffer than the 45.
The 357 didn't count


JohnKSa had it right.

[Hal]

The 357 didn't count

A 180 grain .357 mag out of a 4" barreled gun @ ~ 1200 fps has a very significant felt recoil.

I wouldn't care to push a 200 grain that fast out of the same gun for too many shots.
I doubt there's enough room in the case to load a 240 grain

A 250 grain .45LC out of a similar 4" barreled gun @ ~ 1200 fps has no where near the felt recoil.

There has to be more to the story than what's been listed so far, otherwise the .357 mag., with a lighter bullet in a similar gun, would have less recoil.
In the "real world" though, that's just not the case. That load has significantly more felt recoil.

[buck460XVR]

Originally posted by Hal:

A 180 grain .357 mag out of a 4" barreled gun @ ~ 1200 fps has a very significant felt recoil.

I wouldn't care to push a 200 grain that fast out of the same gun for too many shots.
I doubt there's enough room in the case to load a 240 grain

A 250 grain .45LC out of a similar 4" barreled gun @ ~ 1200 fps has no where near the felt recoil.

There has to be more to the story than what's been listed so far, otherwise the .357 mag., with a lighter bullet in a similar gun, would have less recoil.
In the "real world" though, that's just not the case. That load has significantly more felt recoil.

I think you summed it up well with the remark......"felt recoil". Many .357s are lighter than .45 Colts revolvers, and many times grips are smaller. Many claim recoil is different outta a SA frame .45 Colt(because of grip angle) than from a conventional .357 DA frame. I always look at "felt recoil" similar to "wind chill". While ambient temps may be the same, add a stout wind and it sure as 'ell feels a lot colder.

[mavracer]

Ah, but grasshopper, the 45 would have lower pressure than the 44 with the same projectile @ the same velocity, thus it should recoil a little less.

As John said

Pressure may change the character/feel of the recoil, but it doesn't change the actual free recoil/recoil velocity value unless it significantly changes the velocity of the ejecta other than the bullet.

So in actuality the smaller case volume higher pressure combination would allow you to use slightly less powder so the 44 would have less recoil in that case.
but you're still going to nee sensative test equipment to tell.

[44 AMP]

You can get (or create) equal weight guns. You can use equal weight bullets, But, because you are comparing different size cases, and different size bores, you can have either velocity, pressure, or powder charge weight equal, but not ALL of them.

so, you cannot make the two of them completely equal. With them being as equal as you can make them (but not completely equal in all things, that's impossible), there is a difference in recoil that could be calculated.

I don't believe the difference can be felt by the shooter, it will be a difference, yes, but an insignificant one.

[WESHOOT2]

I was discussing the comparisons amongst my 5.5" Redhawks.

I also have a pair of 4" GP100s.




I have a 7.5" 357 Redhawk, too, and I've used my 180g 'hunting' load --which significantly beats "1200fps"-- in it for USPSA competition ('cause it's all I had with me).

[Nanuk]

I take it that you believe that my old Schaum's Mechanical Engineering Handbbok is incorrect by not including the pressure in the recoil example problem 20.30?

I was just regurgitating what the 45 Colt fans always tell me. I prefer the 44 mag myself.

[Cosmodragoon]

I don't have these in similarly sized guns so I can't tell you. I think the difference would be small enough to be insignificant next to the recoil of either. (For instance, would you notice an extra couple drops in a full glass of water?) If anyone has a chance to try this comparison IRL, I'd be interested to hear about their experiences.

As was already stated, the .454 achieves the same energy at lower pressure. That's because the weight is spread across a wider bullet and the case is larger. That said, remember that the extra width of the .454 bullet should punch a slightly larger hole...

[riddleofsteel]

In this case pressure has more of a function over the time it takes to destroy or work loose the revolver. The 45 bore will throw a 240 grain bullet at the prescribed velocity with less wear and tear than the .429 bore. again simple physics.

[JohnKSa]

It is recoil and friction that eventually wears out revolvers, not pressure. If a gun fails from pressure then something bulges or ruptures--that's definitely the exception in terms of what finally wears a gun out.

Usually a decent quality revolver that hasn't been abused wears out because of the moving parts wearing against each other (friction), or being banged against each other by the forces of recoil. In either case, pressure isn't a factor.

[Cosmodragoon]

riddleofsteel wrote:

In this case pressure has more of a function over the time it takes to destroy or work loose the revolver. The 45 bore will throw a 240 grain bullet at the prescribed velocity with less wear and tear than the .429 bore. again simple physics.

I hadn't thought of that. You have an engineering mind, sir. I have another consideration to add. I haven't handled a whole lot of examples but I have noticed important design differences between .44s and .454s. An obvious reason for this is that one cartridge is larger than the other but is one designed to be stronger than the other? (This is definitely the case with .454's super-magnum cousin, the .460.) Even if not, the size difference alone should change the tolerances. Any thoughts on that?


JohnKSa wrote:

It is recoil and friction that eventually wears out revolvers, not pressure. If a gun fails from pressure then something bulges or ruptures--that's definitely the exception in terms of what finally wears a gun out.

I think there was an assumed correlation between operating pressure, recoil, vibrational stress, etc...

[JohnKSa]

I think there was an assumed correlation between operating pressure, recoil, vibrational stress, etc...

The assumption is incorrect. There is not a correlation between operating pressure and recoil (as already discussed) nor, in general, between operating pressure and vibrational stress.

A simple example would be to compare the relative durability of guns firing 9mm and .40S&W. Both operate at similar pressure and yet there would be little debate that given similar firearms, the 9mm will be more durable. The higher slide velocity (recoil velocity) due to additional ejecta momentum of the .40S&W is what makes the .40S&W harder on guns in spite of the fact that it operates at the same pressure as the 9mm.

Similarly, 9mm and .357Magnum operate at the same pressure and yet no one would suggest that the durability of two basically identical revolvers, one chambered for 9mm and the other for .357Magnum would be the same as a result of the identical operating pressures. Clearly the additional recoil of the .357Mag is going to make it harder on guns than the 9mm even though they operate at identical pressures.

The .45ACP operates at much lower pressure than the 9mm. In spite of that, no one would suggest that in identical guns the 9mm will wear out guns faster than the .45ACP due to the higher operating pressure of the 9mm.

Finally, we'd have to concede that a revolver chambered for .45-70 is going to last much longer than one chambered for 9mm if we try to correlate low pressure with longevity.

It is true that there is additional stress on a gun (primarily the chamber and barrel) that operates at higher pressures. However in terms of longevity, this is a red herring.

If a gun were to fail from the repetitive stress from pressure, the failure would manifest itself as a rupture or bulge of the chamber or barrel. We don't see those kinds of failures showing up as the result of long use. That kind of failure is the result of an overpressure cartridge or a defective firearm--not the result of a high round count.

Guns wear out from moving parts rubbing together (normal wear and tear from friction) and from recoil banging things around and slamming parts into each other until something eventually cracks or deforms.