The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 21, 2013, 09:04 PM   #1
fishhead1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 134
.41 Colt Ammo?

Just found (by accident) .41 Colt ammo (200 gr Round Nose Flat Point) for sale (Ammo To Go). Now I'm wondering. How does .41 Colt ammo compare to .41 Remington Magnum ammo (same relationship as .38 Special compared to .357 Magnum)? How do the .41 Colt cases compare to .41 Magnum cases (or, are these the same cases, but just loaded down to "Cowboy Loads"?) And why do I not see .41 Colt loadings in any (recent) reloading manuals? Also, is this .41 Colt ammo made to be shot in .41 Magnum revolvers? As a matter of interest, I have an OLD (circa 1953) Lyman reloading handbook that includes loadings for a .41 Colt (Long) cartridge, but gives no info (dimensions etc) about the case itself.
fishhead1 is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 09:44 PM   #2
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,367
The .41 Long Colt and the .41 Remington Magnum have no relationship.

You can't fire .41 Colt in the .41 Magnum. You can fire .41 Short Colt in the .41 Long Colt, but the .41 Short is even more obsolete than the .41 Long.

The .41 Long Colt was introduced around 1877 for the Colt Double Action Thunderer revolver.

It became moderately popular in a variety of Colt revolvers over the years. Some other manufacturers made guns for it, but really not many.

As originally loaded, the bullet was heeled, like a .22 Long Rifle, meaning that the head was the same diameter as the outside of the case, and had a smaller diameter shank on it that fit into the case mouth.

As originally loaded the bullet head was close to .41 caliber, while the shank was .38 or so caliber.

In the 1890s Colt dropped the heeled bullet and went with one that was like a modern bullet, a single diameter. Easier to make, easier to load, easier to deal with all around.

To make it work in older guns, they gave the base of the bullet a large hollow, and also made the bullet very soft. On firing, the base would expand into the rifling and you'd get passable accuracy. Most of the time.

With the advent of the .38 Special from Smith & Wesson, the .41 Long Colt began a rather rapid decline in popularity.

Colt quit chambering guns for it in the 1920s (or around there), and most ammo companies dropped the round from production around World War II and never brought it back.

It was a decent cartridge, using a 200 or so grain lead bullet at a moderate velocity, but the .38 Special simply outstripped it in popularity.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 10:20 PM   #3
fishhead1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 134
Wow, that was quick! Thanks for the info. So, I assume that the .41 Colt ammo that I'm seeing for sale is intended for use in "old" original .41 Cal revolvers (for Cowboy Action enthusiasts?) and not for anything produced in today's market (or is someone now producing .41 Colt replica revolvers for today's market)? This brings up another thought. Who's making the .41 Colt cases these days. The ammo I saw for sale is produced by a company called Ultramax. Wonder where they are getting the cases? (Just thinking out loud.)
fishhead1 is offline  
Old August 21, 2013, 10:50 PM   #4
billygun
Member
 
Join Date: June 26, 2013
Posts: 28
Thanks,Irwin. Good Stuff.
billygun is offline  
Old August 22, 2013, 06:10 AM   #5
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
Starline Brass is probably the source of Ultramax's .41 Colt brass. Just looked and they are currently out of stock.

The .41 Colt brass will run you between 50¢ to 60¢ per case in lots of 250 or more. By comparison, the larger .41 Remington Magnum cases only run about 16-19¢ per case in lots of 500 or more.

Mike Irwin was right about the .41 Colt. IIRC the original heeled bullet was .401" diameter (the .41 magnum is .410"). The later bullets were smaller to fit inside the case and sized about .386" in diameter. Given that Colt didn't change the bore diameter, this meant an undersized bullet which didn't contribute to any kind of stellar accuracy.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 22, 2013, 11:28 AM   #6
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,367
The only makers of .41 Long brass that I know of are Starline and (possibly) Bertram in Australia.

To the best of my knowledge, no one is making guns chambered for .41 Long Colt, so the ammo is intended to be used in vintage guns.

For many years these guns were truly orphans. Ammo and components were unavailable. To shoot one you had to obtain old ammo, or you had to obtain vintage brass and cast your own bullets.

The .41 case was also an orphan in that no other case could be easily fabricated to replace it.

Those who really wanted to shoot their .41 had to resort to soldering pieces of copper or brass tubing onto a .38 Special case head, which was just large enough, or they turned their own cases out of brass bar stock.

Elmer Keith considered the .41 to be an excellent defensive handgun round, and considered it to be superior to any .38 Special loading.

I've always been sort of fascinated with the .41 Long Colt. For some reason I really love the orphans.

I always thought that a .41 Long paired with a J frame/Colt Detective Special/Snubby M&P K frame would be a fascinating and fun gun.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 23, 2013, 01:48 AM   #7
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
I'm with Mike on this one. The .41 Colt is an interesting cartridge for several reasons, not the least of which is that it was considered an effective round.

The original .41 "Long" Colt cartridge wasn't a barn burner. Black powder loads run between about 650-725 fps. Smokeless powder loads can get up to 885 fps in sturdier guns. That puts energy ranges from about 170-343 ft-lbs.

It was an old, broken 1892 Colt revolver that originally drew me to this "mid size" caliber. Through that gun I met a guy with a genuine Colt Thunderer who let me fire three precious rounds of his reloads out of it. Instant enjoyment! The down side is that it had all the accuracy of a shotgun at 20 yards. Bullets generally landed within about 2-3" of POA.

Sadly the .41 Colt was obsolete before my father was born but the infatuation with the Colt led me to become a fan of the .41 Magnum and .41 Special.

I wish someone would pick up the .41 Special and standardize it so SAMMI would list it with a standard pressure. Then Mike and I might get what we want -- some big bore K/L frame revolvers that throw a big enough wad of lead to be effective and fun to shoot.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 23, 2013, 10:21 AM   #8
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,367
I never had much success trying .41 Special loads in my Model 58.

Once I dropped down below 800 fps with WW 231 my groups opened up significantly and I got evidence that my bullets were starting to tumble.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 24, 2013, 12:15 AM   #9
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
Mike,
I think it varies a little by the specific firearm. I found instability in my original M-58 at around 830 fps (oblong holes) and at 802 fps two definite keyholes. Others, like John Taffin using a Ruger SA, showed good accuracy with 5.0g of Unique @ ~798fps and a 215 LSWC.

A lot of folks trim their brass to 1.160" while some others make it 1.150", however I don't know there is a big difference.

For me, anything flying under 980 fps out of a 4" launch tube recoils like a .38 wadcutter in an N-Frame. Once you get into the 800 fps range it feels like you're shooting mouse farts.

I'm wondering if a lighter bullet, like a 190gr SWC with H4227 might work better.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 24, 2013, 08:11 AM   #10
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,367
I was shooting a 200 grain hard cast lead bullet. I was using unaltered .41 Mag brass and seating the bullets normally.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 25, 2013, 10:39 AM   #11
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
Mike, you and I are just lazy and/or cheap. Neither one of us took the time to trim down some brass for better accuracy. Apparently that does make a difference -- at least several people think it does -- with reduced loads.

Did you ever read Rocky Raab's write up? Using brass trimmed to 1.150" he said it was he had difficulty finding a bad load. Mind you he was getting 2"-3" groups at 25 yards on his first few tries. Taffin wrote about the .41 Special and was able to get some sub 1.5" groups with brass trimmed to 1.160". YMMV.

Here's a link to Rocky's article. Worth reading for the enthusiasm at least.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old August 25, 2013, 09:16 PM   #12
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,367
Nope, I've never read his article -- I will tomorrow.

I can't see, however, how trimming the brass would result in better accuracy given the much greater bullet jump into the forcing cone.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old August 26, 2013, 07:50 PM   #13
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
I wondered the same thing. I can see better accuracy from a shorter case -- more uniform ignition -- with a shorter cylinder. It may be that uniformity of ignition at low velocities is the key.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06306 seconds with 10 queries