M.L. McPherson

Synopsis: We now have many factory ammunition options for use in 454 Casull chambered revolvers. In terms of energy, these loads range from top-end 44 Magnum to nearly 308 Winchester rifle levels. Bullet designs include non-expanding, controlled expansion and violent expansion. Generally, these loads offer exemplary performance. Importantly, it is quite difficult for the handloader to create 454 ammunition surpassing factory offerings in terms of accuracy, energy or (especially) functionality.

Freedom Arms is no longer in the ammunition business. Had this change occurred several years ago, it would have left the 454 Casull owner with only one option – handloading. Fortunately, there are now at least four major players offering 454 Casull ammo: Buffalo Bore, Cor-Bon, Hornady and Winchester. Current loadings total fifteen (as of late 1999). Bullet types include several non-expanding designs (hard cast and jacketed) and various jacketed expanding types (some of which give violent expansion while others offer more controlled mushrooming. Bullet weights range from 240 grains to 360 grains. Muzzle energy ranges from about 950 to 2125 foot-pounds.

While this seems an inordinate range, it is probably insufficient! We still need someone to offer 454 cased loads generating no more than 1000 fps with a bullet of about 260 grains. Such a load provides all the power needed for many applications and allows novice shooters to get used to handling this revolver, without subjecting their anatomy to the grueling recoil of even the lightest current factory loads, let alone the truly punishing hammering doled out by the most powerful offerings.

The lightest factory 454 offerings generate entirely too much recoil for the typical novice. To place 454-revolver recoil in perspective, consider that Cor-Bon’s 360-grain load, fired in a typical revolver, generates as much recoil energy as a 500-grain, 458 Winchester Magnum load, fired in a 13-pound rifle. Perhaps firing a 13 pound 458 Win Mag does not sound all that bad but consider forcing your hand (or hands) to absorb 100% of that punishment! Consider also that upon firing, the revolver is almost instantly accelerated into the shooter’s hand at over 30 fps. This is much faster than the recoil of any normal rifle and recoil velocity is the major physiological factor in recoil punishment.

Use of 45 Colt ammunition in the 454 is proscribed by Freedom Arms. The problem is, (owing to the shorter case) 45 Colt loads can leave rings of lead at the front of the chambers. If full-power 454 loads are chambered and fired without removing these lead deposits, it is possible to "ring" the chamber, destroying the cylinder. Ideally, use only 454 cases in 454 chambered guns. There is, however, one can seat bullets to standard 45 Colt length and use 45 Colt loads.

Performance measurement of factory 454 ammunition divides into four distinct categories: accuracy, energy (muzzle & down-range), functionality and terminal bullet performance. I would almost certainly err in trying to order the significance of each, beyond this simple fact: functionality comes first and foremost. In a revolver that might be needed to save the user’s life, any load that is not 100% reliable is potentially less than worthless. Specifically, the overriding concern among serious 454 shooters is: "Will every case hold the bullet during recoil, every time?"

This issue is so important that I am compelled to state something entirely contrary to my handloader’s ego: Those hunting dangerous game with the 454 are strongly advised to use an appropriate factory load. Having handloaded and fired many thousands of 454 rounds, using various types of bullets (ranging from 200 grains to 525 grains), and having listened to many accounts from other serious 454 users, I am persuaded that it is truly difficult to produce full-power 454 handloads that are 100% dependable!

At least one handloading Alaskan hunter has found out the hard way that a pulled bullet is certain to occur at the worst possible time – as just you fire a shot that wounds, but does not stop, an enraged Kodiak bear intent upon serious mayhem. While that hunter is reported to have survived, we suspect he learned that a 454 revolver is something less than an effective club.

I am not saying that you cannot produce 100% reliable full-power 454 loads. What I am saying is this, I would prefer to use factory ammo for such applications.

I must note another concern about 454 handloading. Most jacketed component bullets are not designed to handle full-power 454 pressures. Using such bullets rapidly damages the forcing cone. This can lead to irreparable gun damage.

Limited accuracy testing in a Freedom Arms revolver suggests that every current factory load is capable of outstanding accuracy. Were I to thoroughly test this aspect, I would only prove myself incapable of shooting such an accurate gun with a sufficiently consistent hold to fairly compare so many loads. Furthermore, since I am human, I make no apology for omitting the grueling testing such an analysis would require.

I am confident that each of these loads has the intrinsic accuracy necessary to place the bullet well inside a four-inch circle at 100 yards, when fired from a Freedom Arms revolver. I suspect that several are true MOA performers. Such accuracy is certainly sufficient for any reasonable handgun hunting.

Now, finally, to the heart of this article: terminal bullet performance. In writings on this subject, I have often stated a paramount fact, one that should be obvious but is overlooked by many pundits. Specifically, when considering the potential effectiveness of a hunter’s shot, three things are critical, see table:

While it is unfair to claim that delivered energy does not matter, the following evaluation should make it clear that in real-world applications, increased energy cannot substitute for either proper bullet performance or proper shot placement. Frankly, a gut shot elk is a gut shot elk, it makes essentially no difference how much energy the bullet carried; equally, a small-caliber, round-nosed bullet that punches cleanly through the animal without expanding must encounter heavy bone, brain, spinal cord, heart or a major artery to offer any chance of rapidly incapacitating the animal – as in, before it mauls the hunter beyond all recognition. Similarly, a frangible bullet that fails to penetrate into the boiler room is unlikely to do the job.

Conversely, a relatively measly 22 Magnum HP fired into the lungs of a broadside elk will almost certainly kill within a few minutes. Furthermore, practically every serious hunter of the cartridge era has developed some alternative to "kinetic energy" as an evaluation technique for judging the potential effectiveness of a load – this fact must mean something! While we will never convince everyone that delivered energy is overrated, we hope these thoughts will give you pause to consider.

So, how do we test bullet performance? While I would love to work at a slaughterhouse, testing the effectiveness of various loads and shot placements, I have not found the kind soul who is ready, willing and able to finance such an endeavor. Therefore, I make do with two very simple and effective mediums: saturated and dry telephone book. Saturated telephone book is a credible mimic of soft tissue. It contains water, cellulose and clay in proportions sufficiently similar to living tissue to make an excellent proxy. Equally important, this medium is simple for any serious hunter to prepare and is quite repeatable.

On the other hand, dry telephone book is a fine mimic for heavy bone. A bullet that survives a full velocity impact with this medium can be counted upon to survive impact with the heaviest bone.

Evaluation of such a test includes measurement of six pertinent factors:

My testing method, a modification of one advocated by the late Finn Aagaard, involves firing into the face of stacks of telephone books. For the saturated paper test, I make bundled units that begin as 9-inches of dry paper (I remove any shiny pages). These stacks are saturated (wherein the stack expands to about 13-inches), then pressed to a 12-inch thickness and finally tied with fishing line. At least three of these stacks are placed one in front of the other (very deeply penetrating solids can require many more stacks).

My experience suggests that for elk-sized animals, a total penetration in saturated telephone book of about 18-inches is completely adequate for expanding bullets – Aagaard felt this was adequate for most North American Species. Since hunters using non-expanding bullets probably intend to take shots into heavy bone, such bullets should penetrate deeper. The following table gives what should be reasonable relative values for various types of game and bullets. Of course, the amount of penetration you will need depends critically upon the types of shots that you will take – raking shots might require more, broadside shots into the ribcage, less.

The results of our 454 testing are listed in the following table. Readers should review these data to gain an understanding of the wide variation in performance among factory loads.