.45 - Interesting Article
- Thread starter sixty9santa
- Start date
In fact the US Army adopted the Colt New Service Revolver Model of 1909 chambered in .45 LOng Colt for special use in the Philippines. This was a stop gap measure as as early as 1900 the US Army had decided to move towards an Automatic pistol due to the problems associated with the revolvers of the day in particular the 1873 SAA which was prone to breakage and as Claven2 properly reports difficult if not impossible to reload under anything but ideal conditions. Colt New Service also had it's weaknesses not the least of which was the cylinders would not always line up properly resulting in shaven lead and poor accuracy. Be that as it may the Army was already commited to a pistol of automatic design and evetually settled on the Model 1911.
deanml said:
At that time my understanding was that they did it for the same reasons lighter caliber pistols have replaced heavier caliber pistols the world over since the firearm was invented:
The use of the pistol and pistol cartridge weapons was de-emphasized in the type of combat envisioned, and the lighter, more personel friendly caliber was adopted. When pistols are needed to actually kill people instead of punch paper and look sharp in officer's holsters, the heavier calibers again come into favor.
Nothing confrontational : get your facts strait. The Brits had nothing to do in the US Army board of Ordinance choice of small Arms. They made their own studies and tests on livestock and more important, took some lesson out of the wars they entered into.
Reference : Pistol of the World.. <The Philippine Inssurection convinced the US Army of the need for a minimum caliber of .45 inches for any futur sidearm, persuading Colt to begin work on an adaptation of the existing 38 caliber M1902. The new 45 rimless Smokeless cartridge proved weeker than the US Army requested, but eventually led to the legendary 45 ACP>
I can quote you other references in the Book of the 1911, US Army Small Arms reference guide, The Philipines Wars, The US Army at War ect...if you do not have acces to any of those, American Handgunner touched the subject with an article by Venturino on the .45 ACP and the rimmed .45.
The .38 was insufficient and proven itself a failure. As for the Pilippines Insurection, yes, they did request a .45 LC sidearms in a hurry and got them, Colt Single action and double action. This was even part of a documentary on US Wars presented on History channel a couple of month ago. This is history and documented history.
Reference : Pistol of the World.. <The Philippine Inssurection convinced the US Army of the need for a minimum caliber of .45 inches for any futur sidearm, persuading Colt to begin work on an adaptation of the existing 38 caliber M1902. The new 45 rimless Smokeless cartridge proved weeker than the US Army requested, but eventually led to the legendary 45 ACP>
I can quote you other references in the Book of the 1911, US Army Small Arms reference guide, The Philipines Wars, The US Army at War ect...if you do not have acces to any of those, American Handgunner touched the subject with an article by Venturino on the .45 ACP and the rimmed .45.
The .38 was insufficient and proven itself a failure. As for the Pilippines Insurection, yes, they did request a .45 LC sidearms in a hurry and got them, Colt Single action and double action. This was even part of a documentary on US Wars presented on History channel a couple of month ago. This is history and documented history.
Why don't YOU get your facts straight?!? Where did I say ANYTHING about the British studies?
You're so confused you're mistaking my posts with someone else's!!! In fact I even mentioned the livestock tests before you did - go re-read my accurate posts please and stop with the:
You're so confused you're mistaking my posts with someone else's!!! In fact I even mentioned the livestock tests before you did - go re-read my accurate posts please and stop with the:
Claven2,
Each time somebody add or do not agree with you and on your statement you blow your top. It's a wonder that you are allowed to own guns at all with such a temper !!
You wrote :
''It was hardly a case of the ordnance general declaring "these .38's are junk, break out the 45's! .45 is the only caliber henceforth for all US army guns!"
This is at exactly what my answer was directed to. The US Army junked the .38 because of field failure to stop. You are quite good in diminishing other comments and answers in most forum. With more than 5000 posts, we can all see by ourself the kind of individual you are. The confused and confrontational is you. Do not look any further.
As for your comment, stop with the: since we live in a free country, I will keep in writing what I have to say. That you like it ot not. You always got the option of typing another URL and choose another forum.
Cannuck44 wrote :
Janeau - not according to Gen. Hatcher who was head of the US ordnance branch at one point. In fact the British studies played a part in the decision. Have a book on the 1911 and also the history of cartridges and there development.
It will be appreciated to have the book references. Nothing can be found ( in what I got) that relate to US using Brits test as a basis. Most development of the .45 was performed by Colt who introduced this round in their model 1905- used in the US Army trial ( trial - testing guns - not ammo performance- that eliminated the Luger .45 at that time)
As is today, military test and evaluation is not something that is shared. It is done in upmost secrecy. Since Colt was involved and developped it, they will have wanted to keep all of it under cover. There is also the fact that the Brits were quite far from the .45 acp/825 FPS with their 455/476 caliber Webley round at 600 FPS.
As for other Cannuck44 comments :
''Not sure why you are so anal retentive or that a PITA. I am sure you will clarify that for me as well''
I do not know were you got educated to write like that.
On the Internet, you are supposed to write no more that what you are willing to say in person. if you were venturing into talking as you write, I am sure you will run into trouble very fast.
All those unnecessary comments detract from the topic and do not add to it as an informative piece. Forums should be used to exchange information and idees - be good or bad - and different point of views on a subject. This is all it is about. Nobody know it all. If you decide to participate in a topic, you can be proven right or wrong and this is part of the ''talk''. It does not mean that any of the members are jerks, stupid or anal. If you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen... but do it with class not by acting( writing) as punks.
:? :?
Each time somebody add or do not agree with you and on your statement you blow your top. It's a wonder that you are allowed to own guns at all with such a temper !!
You wrote :
''It was hardly a case of the ordnance general declaring "these .38's are junk, break out the 45's! .45 is the only caliber henceforth for all US army guns!"
This is at exactly what my answer was directed to. The US Army junked the .38 because of field failure to stop. You are quite good in diminishing other comments and answers in most forum. With more than 5000 posts, we can all see by ourself the kind of individual you are. The confused and confrontational is you. Do not look any further.
As for your comment, stop with the: since we live in a free country, I will keep in writing what I have to say. That you like it ot not. You always got the option of typing another URL and choose another forum.
Cannuck44 wrote :
Janeau - not according to Gen. Hatcher who was head of the US ordnance branch at one point. In fact the British studies played a part in the decision. Have a book on the 1911 and also the history of cartridges and there development.
It will be appreciated to have the book references. Nothing can be found ( in what I got) that relate to US using Brits test as a basis. Most development of the .45 was performed by Colt who introduced this round in their model 1905- used in the US Army trial ( trial - testing guns - not ammo performance- that eliminated the Luger .45 at that time)
As is today, military test and evaluation is not something that is shared. It is done in upmost secrecy. Since Colt was involved and developped it, they will have wanted to keep all of it under cover. There is also the fact that the Brits were quite far from the .45 acp/825 FPS with their 455/476 caliber Webley round at 600 FPS.
As for other Cannuck44 comments :
''Not sure why you are so anal retentive or that a PITA. I am sure you will clarify that for me as well''
I do not know were you got educated to write like that.
On the Internet, you are supposed to write no more that what you are willing to say in person. if you were venturing into talking as you write, I am sure you will run into trouble very fast.
All those unnecessary comments detract from the topic and do not add to it as an informative piece. Forums should be used to exchange information and idees - be good or bad - and different point of views on a subject. This is all it is about. Nobody know it all. If you decide to participate in a topic, you can be proven right or wrong and this is part of the ''talk''. It does not mean that any of the members are jerks, stupid or anal. If you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen... but do it with class not by acting( writing) as punks.
:? :?
"As is today, military test and evaluation is not something that is shared. It is done in upmost secrecy. Since Colt was involved and developped it, they will have wanted to keep all of it under cover. There is also the fact that the Brits were quite far from the .45 acp/825 FPS with their 455/476 caliber Webley round at 600 FPS."
Really, you amaze me. No doubt that is why the tests are published on the internet - go to RCMP/FBI websites for starters. All their firearm testing is there. Good way to keep a secret.
THere was no secret in the US ARmy's desire for a .45 round or an automatic pistol. Makers from around the world produced designs and submitted them at that time.
Edited old post to add "is" poor typist. If you don't know what "PITA" stands for PM me.
Well I don't know whether or not I have enough education and not sure where it all came from. Somehow I manage to raise a family, have a sucessful career and get through life without causing to many to much problems. Boys are off on there own providing for themselves in endeavors they chose, and the wife of 35 years is still with me. Paid a few dollars tax and now ready to seek out some other life endeavors before they lay me in a box.
No doubt my educaton gaps will be exposed and filled in by others so glad you pointed that out to me.
Really, you amaze me. No doubt that is why the tests are published on the internet - go to RCMP/FBI websites for starters. All their firearm testing is there. Good way to keep a secret.
THere was no secret in the US ARmy's desire for a .45 round or an automatic pistol. Makers from around the world produced designs and submitted them at that time.
Edited old post to add "is" poor typist. If you don't know what "PITA" stands for PM me.
Well I don't know whether or not I have enough education and not sure where it all came from. Somehow I manage to raise a family, have a sucessful career and get through life without causing to many to much problems. Boys are off on there own providing for themselves in endeavors they chose, and the wife of 35 years is still with me. Paid a few dollars tax and now ready to seek out some other life endeavors before they lay me in a box.
No doubt my educaton gaps will be exposed and filled in by others so glad you pointed that out to me.
This thread, from another forum, is full of up-to-date info on modern balistics research. Many of the guys in this thread are former members of the IWBA (international wound balistics association) as well as very experienced ER doctors. So they are speaking with a considerable ammount of authority on the subject.
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000581
*EDIT* - If you browse around in the "terminal effects forum" on that site, you will see many other good threads on the suject too. Some are a year or 2 old, so you will have to do a bit of digging, but it's worth it.
http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000581
*EDIT* - If you browse around in the "terminal effects forum" on that site, you will see many other good threads on the suject too. Some are a year or 2 old, so you will have to do a bit of digging, but it's worth it.
