45 Super v 10mm PCC for hunting... deer?. ELK!!?

[Big Shrek]

.45Super is a heck of a round!
https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/the-all-new-big-45-super-thread.1593879/

Most difficult thing is doing the reloading yourself...
you can't find the ammo anywhere...only Starline brass to make yer own.

 

[Pistoler0]

.45Super is a heck of a round!
https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/the-all-new-big-45-super-thread.1593879/

I have been trying to join GlockTalk in order to post in that particular thread, but for whatever reason it restricts me and keeps me from posting.

But it THE thread to read for those interested in 45 Super

 

[Koda94]

I thought the 45 Super became obsolete and was replaced by the 45SMC?

 

[Pistoler0]

Both are in production. I prefer 450 SMC, but I can only find it factory loaded from Double Tap.

45 Super I can find for Underwood, Buffalo Bore and others.

 

[Koda94]

Interesting,
Are the two rounds interchangeable?

 

[Scorch]

My understanding is for elk you generally need or want 1800 flt lb for a clean kill.

Um, uh, no. About 50 years ago (as an eager youmg teenage lad), I was reading in a gun rag of some sort (Outdoor Life, Field & Stream, or whatever), and the argument was being made to set minimum energy levels for big game, deer was postulated to be 600 ft-lbs minimum for a clean kill, elk 1,000 ft-lbs for a clean kill. Some knowledgeable folks were saying that shot placement was more important than energy, but that 500 ft-lbs would be adequate for deer, 800 ft-lbs for elk. This would keep from outlawing several well-respected big game cartridges (44-40, 38-40, 38-55, 250 Savage, and others of their ilk). Basically, the argument was that shooters have a hard time shooting magnums, and a miss with a magnum is still a miss, and a hit with a standard caliber rifle is still a hit, and it doesn't really take that much to kill a deer. I don't want to get into the argument itself, but if 1000 ft-lbs was adequate for elk 50 years ago, it will be adequate for elk even in the 21st Century. But people 50 years ago generally got closer to the animals to shoot.

As far as need vs want, that is a whole different discussion.

Finally, even really weak rifle cartridges are more powerful than most really powerful handgun cartridges.

 

[DT Guy]

When folks talk about how this or that caliber will kill an elk, moose or bear 'if placed through the heart', I think they're missing an important part of cartridge selection; we don't choose enough cartridge to cleanly kill with a *perfect* shot, we choose one likely to work with the inevitable IMPERFECT shots.

A .22LR through the eye socket would likely kill an elephant (it's killed countless domestic steer), but counting on an eye socket shot wouldn't be good hunting ethics. We need enough energy/penetration/damage to cleanly kill with slightly imperfect bullet placement-a margin of error, if you will-to ensure we're humanely taking animals with our sometimes imperfect shooting.

Larry

 

[taylorce1]

Please don't confuse what Colorado requires for big game hunting as a standard of what it takes to kill any big game.

Anyway, it is a common understanding that 1,000 ft-lbs of KE are a minimum for hunting elk.

I own a 45 ACP Pistol Caliber Carbine (Hi-Point 4595 don't laugh) with a 17.5" barrel. It is rated for +P ammo and it shoots Super fine. .........

I was very pleasantly surprised to find out that the carbine shooting factory 45 Super ammo does reach the required 1,000 ft-lbs for elk!!

I'm going to assume so correct me if I'm wrong, you're talking mainly of hunting in OUR state of Colorado? While you're not wrong about it being a requirement to kill elk in Colorado you are wrong in your figures from "BBTI". I think you've glossed over some very important info in the Colorado hunting regulations.

1. CENTERFIRE RIFLES

a. Must be a minimum of .24 caliber (6 mm).

b. Must have a minimum 16-inch barrel and be at least 26 inches long.

c. If semiautomatic, a maximum of six rounds are allowed in the magazine and
chamber combined.

d. Must use expanding bullets that weigh a minimum of 70 grains for deer, pronghorn and bear, 85 grains for elk and moose, and have an impact energy (at 100 yards) of 1,000 ft.-pounds as rated by manufacturer.

So if you plug the numbers by BBTI into a ballistics computer like JBM ballistics you'll find that if falls well short of the required ft-lbs of energy required to hunt with it as a rifle cartridge. While it might start out with over 1000 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle by the time it makes 100 yards it is in the 600 ft-lbs range. Making your Hi-Point not legal to hunt with by regulations.

.41 Magnum is kind of the standard for a cartridge that is legal by Colorado regulations to hunt with in a traditional handgun for all big game. It meets the 500 ft-lbs of energy required at 50 yards by manufacturer for a handgun, even the .45 Super is going to have a hard time of keeping 500 ft-lbs at 50 yards. The 10mm on the other hand would be legal in a handgun cartridge in Colorado as rated by manufacturer. However, in a PCC they'll fall short of what's required for a rifle every time. Even the .44 Mag falls short in a carbine rifle to meet what regulation requires.

Now I'm not telling you to break Colorado game laws. However, I believe that a PCC is perfectly capable of killing elk if used correctly. Common sense will tell you which ones are better than others, but if you choose to hunt with a PCC for elk go out of state.

 

[Pistoler0]

Koda,

yes, the two rounds are interchangeable.

 

[Pistoler0]

So if you plug the numbers by BBTI into a ballistics computer like JBM ballistics you'll find that if falls well short of the required ft-lbs of energy required to hunt with it as a rifle cartridge. While it might start out with over 1000 ft-lbs of energy at the muzzle by the time it makes 100 yards it is in the 600 ft-lbs range. Making your Hi-Point not legal to hunt with by regulations.

.41 Magnum is kind of the standard for a cartridge that is legal by Colorado regulations to hunt with in a traditional handgun for all big game. It meets the 500 ft-lbs of energy required at 50 yards by manufacturer for a handgun, even the .45 Super is going to have a hard time of keeping 500 ft-lbs at 50 yards.

Taylorc, hi, fellow coloradan

this post was more of a discussion exercise, not really advocating for using a Hi-Point for hunting. I thought it'd be an entertaining thought. I agree that it would be very marginal.

But what surprised me the most when I researched the graphs for the OP was that out of a carbine, the 45 Super out peforms 10mm!!
Per the OP I think that a PCC carbine in 45 Super might be adequate for deer, but I agree that it is too much of a stretch for elk.

As for its legality in CO and regarding the ballistics, I did put it into a ballistic calculator and when you take into account altitude yada yada... some 45 Super loadings do net the 1000 ft-lbs at 100 yds. Maybe I'll go do it and post it back for the sake of discussion.

But for pistol, for sure that 45 Super (depending on the load) meets the 500 ft-lbs at 50 yards CO requirements for big game. This one I have checked and re-checked.

Again, I am just saying this for the sake of discussion, and I'll bet you a beer that out of a carbine, 45 Super might eek out the numbers to be legal in CO for rifle hunting.

But no, I am not advocating for using a Hi-Point for hunting elk. Much less in my case, when I have a .308.

 

[taylorce1]

I did put it into a ballistic calculator and when you take into account altitude yada yada... some 45 Super loadings do net the 1000 ft-lbs at 100 yds. Maybe I'll go do it and post it back for the sake of discussion.

But for pistol, for sure that 45 Super (depending on the load) meets the 500 ft-lbs at 50 yards CO requirements for big game. This one I have checked and re-checked.

I don't know what Voodoo you pulled to get 1000 ft lbs of energy at 100 yards out a ballistics calculator. I put in 14K feet of elevation and none of the 185-230 grain loads using the MV given by bullet weight from BBTI reached anywhere near it. 800 ft lbs was about the best it could do. To get the 1000 ft lbs at 100 yards I had to up the MV by 200+ fps.

I'll agree some Super loads do meet minimum requirements to hunt with a handgun in Colorado. However you're going to have to use a pistol with a 5" or longer barrel to get the necessary velocity to keep the energy at 500+ ft lbs at 50 yards according to what JBM spits out with the BBTI numbers.

 

[GeauxTide]

Elmer Keith killed a huge Mule Deer at 600 measured yards. His companion wounded it at closer range with a 300 H&H. He shot 4 times, missing twice. At pistol pressures, you're not going to get the additional velocity in a longer barrel that you think. For any of my 12 pistols or revolvers, I don't shoot farther than what I can keep in 8".

 

[44 AMP]

At pistol pressures, you're not going to get the additional velocity in a longer barrel that you think.

ok, what pressure is "pistol pressure"??

 

[Pistoler0]

I don't know what Voodoo you pulled to get 1000 ft lbs of energy at 100 yards out a ballistics calculator. I put in [..] 800 ft lbs was about the best it could do.

I'll agree some Super loads do meet minimum requirements to hunt with a handgun in Colorado. You're going to have to use a pistol with a 5" or longer barrel

It was wishful voodoo.

Yep you were right, out of a carbine, per gundata.org I just checked and it never reaches necessary ft-lbs at 100yds to be legal for big game in CO with rifle.

But yes, we agree that interestingly 45 Super does meet the requirements for big game hunting in CO with handgun. 4.6" barrel length of a Glock 21 puts me there.