Well, a buddy came through with some cast 185gr and 200gr SWCs, so I loaded them up and went back out to the range. I also found some uncoated 250gr SWCs and for something different I loaded some 230gr truncated cone bullets that I cast for .45 ACP into some .45 Schofield cases, just to see if what those would do.

Long story short, no luck with the .45 Colt, in any of the loads. I shot them off a sandbag on a bench, in both DA and SA, to try to take as much of me out of the equation as possible, but they were still all over the place and some of the 250gr bullets even showed evidence of tumbling.

Interestingly, the Schofield load showed some promise. Unfortunately, it's a powderpuff load, and not really suitable for any serious use.

The loads I used are as follows:

1. 250gr Cast Sierra LSWC over 8.0 Gr of Unique: 745 FPS
2. 250gr Home Cast Coated LRNFP over 8.0 gr Unique: 784 FPS
3. 200gr LSWC over 9.0gr Unique: 793 FPS
4. 185gr LSC over 9.0gr Unique: 831 FPS
5. 230gr Coated TCFP over 5.5gr Unique in a .45 Schofield case: 609 FPS

Here's an example from the first run in double-action while I was chronographing. The holes circled in green are from one of the 250Gr loads. The holes circled in red are the Schofield load. Shot at 15 yards.



Then I shot it again at 15 yards in single-action, without the chronograph, trying to focus entirely on accuracy:

Left to right:
1. A combination of the 250Gr loads. Quite a few of these were high off paper.
2. The .45 Schofield load (I ran out of the other targets)
3. The 200gr load. One of these was about 1" off-paper to the left.
4. The 185gr load. Three of these were off paper.



My plan at this point is to play with the 230gr bullets a bit more, both in .45 Colt and Schofield brass. Heck, I might even try some autorim if I can get my hands on some. I'm thinking that lower velocities are probably the ticket, but we'll see what the data proves out.

Many years ago, when I first got my Ti framed 450, Taurus was selling "stellar clips" (their name for moon clips) for these revolvers. I bought a few. They were made from plastic and quite thin. They were very easy to load and unload. They made it possible to shoot 45auto ammo in these revolvers. That opened a wide gate for using various 45auto loads and seeing how they perform in these guns.

I haven't seen any for sale in years, but I haven't really been looking, as I don't need any more. Just a thought.

quote:

Originally posted by GT-40DOC:
Many years ago, when I first got my Ti framed 450, Taurus was selling "stellar clips" (their name for moon clips) for these revolvers. I bought a few. They were made from plastic and quite thin. They were very easy to load and unload. They made it possible to shoot 45auto ammo in these revolvers. That opened a wide gate for using various 45auto loads and seeing how they perform in these guns.

I haven't seen any for sale in years, but I haven't really been looking, as I don't need any more. Just a thought.

Interesting. Did they work even with guns that aren't cut for moon clips? Mine is not, and I imagine getting that done to a titanium cylinder would be a difficult and expensive proposition.

None of these revolvers are cut for moon (stellar) clips as far as I know. The stellar clips are very thin and work just fine with no modifications that I know of.

Good to know...I'm gonna try that. I load a lot more ACP than Schofield, and performance should be similar or better if the gun will shoot them.

Not exactly lightweight, but a snubby, you could get a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan in .454 Casull and shoot .45 Colt through it.

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
Not exactly lightweight, but a snubby, you could get a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan in .454 Casull and shoot .45 Colt through it.

Yeah, I've looked at those, but it weighs more than the 69, and while it does give you greater punch in .454 over the .44 Mag, carrying it with .45 Colt is kinda a step backwards in both the power and weigh departments. If I do eventually go that route, it'll probably be an X-Frame in .460. It'll be like carrying a large brick, but the .460 S&W gets as close to .45-70 in a handgun as I'd ever want to go, plus gives you the option of .454 or .45 Colt.

Probably this one, or maybe the 5".

I got some of the Taurus-style .45 moon clips in today. They are indeed very thin. Unfortunately, not thin enough. They fit over the ejector just fine and the rounds chamber, but you can't close the cylinder as there's not enough headspace. I even tried a couple of different headstamps...it ain't gonna happen.

I'm continuing to play with various loads working towards something with acceptable accuracy that will also shoot to point of aim. So far it seems to prefer jacketed bullets. I'm trying to get my hands on some lighter ones as all I currently have are 230 and 250gr XTPs.

92… I was really hoping this worked ou/works out for you as I truly had an interest in this gun. I appreciate your efforts to make it serviceable and look forward to further reports. I know I should just go with the 69 in the short barrel and be done with it but I’ve always wanted one of these. My heart keeps telling me to just get the 69 for my needs.its hell to be a revolver lover lol

quote:

Originally posted by Oaklane:
92… I was really hoping this worked ou/works out for you as I truly had an interest in this gun. I appreciate your efforts to make it serviceable and look forward to further reports. I know I should just go with the 69 in the short barrel and be done with it but I’ve always wanted one of these. My heart keeps telling me to just get the 69 for my needs.its hell to be a revolver lover lol

Well, I'm not giving up yet . Hopefully next week sometime I get a chance to visit a shop and pick up some jacketed bullets. Even if I can find a load for it, I don't think this gun is ever going to be the powerhouse I had hoped for. I will say, it has been completely reliable and has never once jumped time. I also did a little polishing on the internals and the trigger cleaned up surprisingly well. I like it more than I thought I'd ever like a Taurus, and I really want to find a place for it in the lineup!

All that said, if you're looking for a small form-factor hand-cannon, you won't go wrong with the 69. I love everything about mine except the weight when I'm carrying it on the trail. On the belt around town or in the car it's fine. And the weight is actually appreciated when I'm shooting it! It has been perfectly reliable, extremely accurate, the trigger cleaned up to a thing of beauty, and it's solid enough that I trust it with some very heavy loads. If I could only keep one of my big bores, it would be the 69.

Like you said, it's hell to be a revolver lover, lol. You find a great one, ought to just be satisfied, but then start looking for the next best thing...that coincidentally isn't made anymore, has no aftermarket support, and is pickier about what it eats than a three-year old at the dinner table .

Sorry to hear that the Taurus-style moon clips did not work for you. Mine came directly from Taurus and work in all three of my big bore Taurus revolvers. Don't give up on your 450, as they are great handguns, and work fantastic as a CCW weapon with the CCI blazer 220gr. JHP ammo. I have never tried to shoot 25 yard groups with mine as I feel that is asking too much of a ported snubby with fixed sights. My eyesight is not so good either these days.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech

Well, I'm not giving up yet . Hopefully next week sometime I get a chance to visit a shop and pick up some jacketed bullets. Even if I can find a load for it, I don't think this gun is ever going to be the powerhouse I had hoped for. I will say, it has been completely reliable and has never once jumped time. I also did a little polishing on the internals and the trigger cleaned up surprisingly well. I like it more than I thought I'd ever like a Taurus, and I really want to find a place for it in the lineup!

I carry the Barnes total copper projectile factory loading in my Total Titanium model 450



The factory claims a velocity of over 1000 FPS with the 200 grain bullet. Personally I have never choreographed it in my little snub nosed revolver. One day I will get around to it

When it comes to hand loads assembled with checked projectiles I am very fond of 250 grain GDHP. When loaded on top of 8.9 grains of Power Pistol this cartridge can achieve to just about 800 FPS out of the total titanium revolver

The only experience I've had with Taurus was a 450 that i got years ago from CDNN. I love .45 Colt so i thought fire sale price on a five shot belly gun how could i go wrong? After 5 shots the cylinder would bind up, back to Taurus for their lifetime warranty they shaved some off the forcing cone, still would bind so they took some off the cylinder. By then it was spitting lead and powder like Mt.Vesuvius so i dumped it at a gun show

I had to remove a few thousands off of the forcing cone of my Ti 450, as it would try to cylinder bind after a few rounds. Not true with the Alum 450. Once that was done, no further problems.

My wrist hurts just looking at that. I have only fired a couple revolvers in 45LC but never a snubby. The Taurus grips are actually quite nice with the ones I have owned in the past and do help with recoil, at least the the 357 I had. Congrats and good luck with it.

I was in training all week at work and this weekend is tied up with stuff too, so I didn't get a chance to shoot. I did swing by the local reloading emporium between other activities today and picked up some 185gr XTPs. Hopefully I can find time this week to load them up and see what happens. I've had no issues with the cylinder on my gun binding up, even with filthy lead bullets.