.460 T/C Encore vs 1892 Lever Action .45 Colt

[TruthTellers]

About 6 months ago I made a thread asking about various .45 caliber rifles and which was right for me. Thanks to a lot of you guys, the possum especially, we came to the conclusion that .45-70 was not necessary for what I would use it for.

Because I own .45 Colt revolvers, there's definitely an appeal to a .45 Colt lever gun or .460 Thompson Center.

So, the question that I have to ask myself is: what does a .460 do from a T/C Encore with a 15 inch barrel that a very hot .45 Colt doesn't do from a 16 inch 1892 Lever action rifle?

Most of my shooting is plinking and some target shooting (I love to get the tightest groups possible) and I do reload for .45 Colt, but would gladly load for the .460 if I owned a gun chambered for it. There is a high possibility I would use either to hunt deer and maybe even moose or elk in the future. I don't live in bear country, so that's not a factor.

 

[GeauxTide]

I'd get the 45 Colt rifle because it can digest the same loads as the pistol. A 45 Colt, with 280s at 1050, is very effective to 100 yards. I had an 1894AE and it would keep 255 SWC at 100 yards in 8", off hand and open sights.

 

[zipspyder]

I agree, you have some revolvers now it's time for a 45 colt lever gun. I personally think it would be more fun to shoot than an Encore.

Or you know buy both.

 

[Hawg]

My preference would be the 92 but if you have .45 Colt pistols you'll need to find a way to keep the hot ones separated. I use black, red and green sharpies to paint the case heads of different loads for my 44-40's.

 

[TruthTellers]

My preference would be the 92 but if you have .45 Colt pistols you'll need to find a way to keep the hot ones separated. I use black, red and green sharpies to paint the case heads of different loads for my 44-40's.

Not an issue for me, the .45 Colt I have is a Ruger, so it can take anything. My other .45 Colt can only shoot lead bullets and I keep those moving slow to prevent leading. I only plan to use jacketed ammunition for the hot stuff anyway.

 

[Pathfinder45]

Get a levergun in 45 Colt. Forget about the 460. If you needed something like that, then maybe you do need a 45-70.

 

[COSteve]

A 45 Colt levergun is a good choice . . . . . as long as it's the correct levergun. Rossi's and Cimarron's copies of the Winchester '92 are very strong actions and can stand Ruger Only level 45 Colt loads with ease. They are great platforms. I have 2 Rossis in 357mag; a 20" carbine and 24" rifle.

I also have 2 Ubertis, an 1866 Yellowboy carbine and 1873 Rifle in 45 Colt and they are also great guns . . . . . . . . . . . ,however, they have Winchester's weaker toggle link actions from the 1860's design and even with modern materials, they are no where near as strong as the '92's action design. As such, I keep my handloads to standard level, 14,000psi load levels for my 45 Colts.

So, if you just want a plinker (I don't think so) you could get either the '66/'73 or the '92 style leverguns but it appears that you want to shoot heavy 45 Colt loads and for them you need the Win '92's action design found in Rossis or Cimarrons.

 

[TruthTellers]

I've eyed the Rossi's in .45 Colt for a while and they're definitely at the top of the list because I'm not gonna bother with anything other than the 92 action in a lever rifle for .45 Colt. The only other .45 Colt lever action that is also a 92 clone is the Tayler's/Chiappa Alaskan Takedown. A lot more money, but I wouldn't have any questions about quality.

What type of accuracy can the Rossi's hold? I've read that with open sights it's about a 5 MOA rifle, but how are they with a scope?

 

[zipspyder]

I wouldn't even recommend trying to scope a Rossi. It will not go well.

 

[TruthTellers]

I wouldn't even recommend trying to scope a Rossi. It will not go well.

Really? Tell me more.

 

[zipspyder]

They don't really make scope mounts for Rossi or at least not anymore. The one I had used one bolt to the receiver then a couple allen screw/holes to use pressure up against the action. Kind of like some of the old enfield scope mounts. I don't think even loctite helped after 2 or 3 shots from my .357 magnum and rounds would be all over the place. Unless you are comfortable drilling and tapping I wouldn't recommend it. Get a Marlin that's pre-tapped for that. Maybe COSteve can shed more light on it...

 

[TruthTellers]

They don't really make scope mounts for Rossi or at least not anymore. The one I had used one bolt to the receiver then a couple allen screw/holes to use pressure up against the action. Kind of like some of the old enfield scope mounts. I don't think even loctite helped after 2 or 3 shots from my .357 magnum and rounds would be all over the place. Unless you are comfortable drilling and tapping I wouldn't recommend it. Get a Marlin that's pre-tapped for that. Maybe COSteve can shed more light on it...

That sucks. I was just looking at the Alaskan Takedown and it is setup to put a long eye relief scope on the barrel and because it's on the barrel, the takedown function of it isn't an issue.

I'll have to think whether I need a scope on something that's going to be a 150 yard rifle at max.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

If you go the 460 route, and I am not recommending it, get a third party barrel.

 

[TruthTellers]

If you go the 460 route, and I am not recommending it, get a third party barrel.

It's helpful when there's an explanation behind a statement like this.

 

[Pathfinder45]

If you even think you might want a scope on it, get a Marlin. But I wouldn't have a scope on a lever-gun, myself. There are really good aperture sights for the Marlin as well as the Winchester. No matter how good the open sights are on the rifle, a decent peep-sight will be way better, easier/quicker to use, with greatly enhanced accuracy; especially so if your eyes aren't what they used to be when you were younger. You may be convinced that you need a scope, when in fact, a good aperture sight may be all you need.

 

[ruggyh]

So, the question that I have to ask myself is: what does a .460 do from a T/C Encore with a 15 inch barrel that a very hot .45 Colt doesn't do from a 16 inch 1892 Lever action rifle?

The 45 Colt will never be able to achieve what a 460 S&W is capable of-the heavier the bullet the greater the disparity. 360 grain GC cast bullet gets about 2100 fps from a 460 S&W with 16" of barrel. The 45 colt wont make 1800 with a 300 grain bullet.

You never mentioned what you are trying to do.

A 45C is plenty of gun for most needs

And if I was looking for a rifle in 460 S&W I would get a Ruger #1- much nicer offering than a TC and if you want to be top of the heap, look at the Bighorn Armory lever gun,
you won't find a nicer built gun, be prepared for sticker shock.

be safe
Ruggy

 

[the possum]

So, the question that I have to ask myself is: what does a .460 do from a T/C Encore with a 15 inch barrel that a very hot .45 Colt doesn't do from a 16 inch 1892 Lever action rifle?

Since you mentioned a 15" barrel, I assume you're talking about the Encore pistol? (Keep in mind it can also be configured as a full sized rifle.)

Well, for starters, it would be a lot easier to carry an Encore pistol in a holster on yer belt. The single shot is also made to be scoped much easier, whereas with the '92 you're better off just forgetting about scopes. The '92 can fire 11 shots in 6 to 10 seconds, unlike any single shot.

These differences are so obvious I'm lead to believe you won't really do much hunting with it. Because the choice would be equally obvious if ya planned to drop a bunch of hogs from a moving 4-wheeler, vs. shooting an elk at 200 yards. How do you enjoy your range time? Do you prefer blasting a bunch of watermelons and cinderblocks, or trying to shoot little groups way out there? (I like both, by the way. ) Do you already own a different rifle for longer range shooting?

If you want to shoot hot loads with heavy-for-caliber bullets, there's no good substitute for case capacity. The .45 Colt will have the advantage over the .45 ACP. The Casull beats the Colt, the S&W beats the Casull, the .45-70 has even more room, and the .458 Lott beats them all. I don't have any experience with big game, so will defer to others on which of those rounds has enough power to do the job. Aside from killing power, the biggest differences will show up in trajectory at extended ranges, and whether ya need a scope to clearly see your target at those ranges.

If that ain't enough to mull over, right now there's 2 Rossi's chambered in .454 Casull on Gun Broker; no telling how many you could have already bought in the past 6 months. And there's also the .450 Bushmaster if you're looking for similar ballistics in a semi-auto (various AR's) or bolt action (Ruger American).

 

[COSteve]

I've eyed the Rossi's in .45 Colt for a while and they're definitely at the top of the list because I'm not gonna bother with anything other than the 92 action in a lever rifle for .45 Colt. The only other .45 Colt lever action that is also a 92 clone is the Tayler's/Chiappa Alaskan Takedown. A lot more money, but I wouldn't have any questions about quality.

What type of accuracy can the Rossi's hold? I've read that with open sights it's about a 5 MOA rifle, but how are they with a scope?

Accuracy with open sights is a function of how well the shooter can sight, not a function of the rifle's mechanical accuracy. Some people can hit a 1 MOA target with irons sights while others can't hit a 10 MOA target with a scope. My 24" 357mag Rossi is equipped with a Marble tang sight with target aperture and a Lyman Globe front sight giving it a 30" sight radius.

I use it along with my 158grn handloads, to shoot at clay pigeons and bowling pins at 200 yds and at steel plates at 300 yds. Practice is what's required at longer ranges with irons. I do almost all of my long gun shooting at 200 yds or farther and I shoot most of my rifles with iron sights

 

[TruthTellers]

Since you mentioned a 15" barrel, I assume you're talking about the Encore pistol? (Keep in mind it can also be configured as a full sized rifle.)

Well, for starters, it would be a lot easier to carry an Encore pistol in a holster on yer belt. The single shot is also made to be scoped much easier, whereas with the '92 you're better off just forgetting about scopes. The '92 can fire 11 shots in 6 to 10 seconds, unlike any single shot.

These differences are so obvious I'm lead to believe you won't really do much hunting with it. Because the choice would be equally obvious if ya planned to drop a bunch of hogs from a moving 4-wheeler, vs. shooting an elk at 200 yards. How do you enjoy your range time? Do you prefer blasting a bunch of watermelons and cinderblocks, or trying to shoot little groups way out there? (I like both, by the way. ) Do you already own a different rifle for longer range shooting?

If you want to shoot hot loads with heavy-for-caliber bullets, there's no good substitute for case capacity. The .45 Colt will have the advantage over the .45 ACP. The Casull beats the Colt, the S&W beats the Casull, the .45-70 has even more room, and the .458 Lott beats them all. I don't have any experience with big game, so will defer to others on which of those rounds has enough power to do the job. Aside from killing power, the biggest differences will show up in trajectory at extended ranges, and whether ya need a scope to clearly see your target at those ranges.

If that ain't enough to mull over, right now there's 2 Rossi's chambered in .454 Casull on Gun Broker; no telling how many you could have already bought in the past 6 months. And there's also the .450 Bushmaster if you're looking for similar ballistics in a semi-auto (various AR's) or bolt action (Ruger American).

Yes, talking about the Encore pistol. I don't care for the super long rifle barrels T/C makes.

When I hunt, it's for meat, so dropping bunches of hogs isn't my bag.

When I'm at the range it's to get the tightest groups possible with my reloads on paper, then it's to just hit steel when I'm shooting steel. Steel at my range is set up at 125 and 200 yards.

I have a few other rifles, but the longest range I have is a Handi Rifle in .308. I don't plan on shooting past 500 yards with that rifle.

I've thought about the .454 Rossi rifles, but if they can't feed .45 Colt, I'm not interested. No interest in .450 Bushmaster.

Every gun I buy, generally, also has to have a secondary role for self defense.

 

[the possum]

I've thought about the .454 Rossi rifles, but if they can't feed .45 Colt, I'm not interested.

Mine has no problem with any of the .45 Colt loads I've tried in it, even with short nosed 200 grainers. The cases are only 0.1" difference in length; the normal bullet weights for each round have longer variances than that. 'Bout the only problems I hear of (but have not personally experienced) are with Keith styled semi wadcutters, that have a sharp front driving band (originally designed to scrape black powder fouling outta the bore). Stick with bullets that have a gentler shoulder & you should be fine.

I hear ya on the rest. For what you enjoy doing then, it sounds like a scoped single shot would likely provide better mechanical accuracy from a bench. But it would not be as shootable for field accuracy compared to nearly any long gun. Likewise, a single shot pistol doesn't sound like it would double for defensive purposes. Have you considered scoping your revolver just to see if you can wring any better accuracy out of it?

Also gotta ask- have you done much shooting with rounds like the .460 out of a light weight pistol? If not, ya might wanna start with Colt level loads, and work your way up. FWIW.