45 Super vs. 460 Rowland

[SVRider]

Just a question/thought.....

45 Super is standard ACP length, but the case is supposed to be strengthened. The 460 Rowland case is lengthened to prevent chambering in an ACP pistol, but the loaded COAL is the same as ACP. This means the useable case capacities are the same (ACP/Super/Rowland). The only real change then is powders...ones that increase pressures and velocities.

Only speculation and one observation, but the sectioned cases also seem identical (making me doubt the "strengthening of the web" line):

http://www.realguns.com/archives/106.htm

My question is then "Is it possible to safely work up 40,000psi loads (ala Rowland) in Super brass and shot in a pistol setup properly to handle Rowland loads, but in a standard ACP length chamber"?

That question may be a bit confusing, but hopefully it makes sense. It seems that the only realy purpose for the extra case length was to keep someone from screwing up and putting a 40ksi cartridge in a pistol designed for a 21ksi load, but after reading the article, I am curious about the real differences in brass strength between the various calibers.

I've recently found someone doing Rowland conversions on the XD platform, but it seems they just rechamber and possibly add recoil spring rate. I don't really think the XD is designed to handle those kinds of pressures/slide velocities, but it sounded like it was intended for woods defense, not for normal target shooting (ala +P's in old alloy J-frames....you can do it, just don't do it a lot)....

If I want "BIG BOOM", I just reach for one of my 45WM's, but the thought of having that power in an ACP-sized package is intriguing.

What are your thoughts?

[bfoosh006]

Just my 2 cents......Possibly....but for me there are to many unanswered questions.
1. Is the "Rowland" brass stronger because of a different heat treatment?
Who knows except the manufacturer...( and I don't feel the need to "experiment" with "Super" brass.)
2. Can you be completely positive that your "Suped" up Super rounds will never be fed into a non-properly set-up 1911?
What if you dropped/lost one round at the range, and someone else stupidly decided to fire it in their Glock....(big advantage with "Rowland" brass.)
3. What if it failed dramaticly... you'd be SOL...

Personally, I would go ahead and get the correct brass and conversion kit. Mostly because of the possiblity of a erreversiable incident. In the big picture, a few hundred bucks, is far cheaper then even a 1/2 hour trip to the ER. (Not to mention, any damage to the firearm.)

And BTW, I bought a Para conversion kit for a friends Christmas present, it "dropped in" with minimum fitting. He did it himself. He rarely fires it, but when he does....he does enjoy the "BIG BOOM" in a high capacity .45. Nice "toy" to fool around with. You can certainly feel it "battering the gun". And assembling it with the recoil spring can be hazardous in its self, (some God awfully high foot pound)

Hope that helps

[1923mack]

The 460 Rowland and 451 Detonics brass are both a little longer than standard 45 brass to keep the rounds out of just any 45 acp gun. If you feel confident that your gun can handle the pressure than you are good to go. You may need to change you springs, no bigge.

[SVRider]

No one please misunderstand. I have no desire to get someone injured. I suppose it was more of a theoretical question. It seems strange to me that they have made such a large alteration to the metalurgy for this run of brass. Possible I suppose, but not so likely in my mind. If cross-sectionally they are that similar/identical, I really wonder about the true upper strength limit of the ACP case....if the Rowland is really just a stretched ACP case or if they truly do something different in the manufacturing of it.

Like I said, if I really want to push a 230gr that hard, I do it sitting on top of 28gr of H110 (in a WinMag case)....

[bfoosh006]

No one please misunderstand. I have no desire to get someone injured. I suppose it was more of a theoretical question. It seems strange to me that they have made such a large alteration to the metalurgy for this run of brass. Possible I suppose, but not so likely in my mind. If cross-sectionally they are that similar/identical, I really wonder about the true upper strength limit of the ACP case....if the Rowland is really just a stretched ACP case or if they truly do something different in the manufacturing of it.

Like I said, if I really want to push a 230gr that hard, I do it sitting on top of 28gr of H110 (in a WinMag case)....

I hear what you are sayin', if it helps at all, and this is by no means scientific, I did ask my friend if he noticed anything different about his 460 Rowland brass. His response was.." It had more of a "ting" sound to it then the ACP brass..) I've noticed that in some older 30/30 Federal brass I have. The older stuff makes a different sound then the newer stuff when it hits the concrete. The newer stuff makes a kind of thud sound while the older is more "metallic" sounding.

Hmmm...that all sounds kinda goofy, but....

[1923mack]

The brass is stronger and in some places thicker. This allows it to get the 40,000 psi pressure. The thickness differences are small and difficult to see or even measure with a micrometer.

[TKM]

Don't try to outsmart the engineers. If they make a mistake it costs lives and lots of money. If you do, please put it on Youtube.

[1923mack]

That is the design pressure for the 460 Rowland. Not suggesting anything more that is published for the brass.