Why hasn't the 460 Rowland caught on better?

[trkkshotbry]

I'm just wondering why the 460 Rowland cartridge hasn't caught on better.
Its an awesome cartridge in 45acp sized package delivering 44mag or better performance.
It was developed in 1999 (I think) , and by now Id think we should be able to buy handguns and carbines chambered from the factory in this hard hitting low recoil cartridge.
I think ill buy a 1911 with a 6" barrel I can convert, slap a compensator on it and keep it as a backup pistol when hunting, and maybe a Masterpiece Arms carbine to keep in the truck for those social occasions when a light handy carbine that can put 1000+ ft lbs of energy on target 10 or 20 times in rapid succession, you know just in case you need to blow a hole in a cement wall for some reason.

 

[Sharpsdressed Man]

I would think that it would have to accelerate the wear and shorten the life of most firearms it would be chambered in. If the 10mm full power loads shorten the estimated life of a 1911 to 7-10 thousand rounds, what would you give a 1911 firing full house .460 Rowland?

 

[57K]

IMO, the best option were the excellent Dan Wesson revolvers chambered for it that were discontinued. Since CZ bought Dan Wesson they've made the unfortunate decision to stop revolver production altogether, and most recently, the fire at the DW plant has put an end to 1911 production as well, for the time being.

With the DW revolvers you could shoot any of the .45 auto pistol rounds. When it comes to the great hypothetical question of which handgun should I carry in Griz territory, the correct response is always, none. But, if you're gonna carry a handgun in Griz country for self protection, the DW in .460 Rowland made a lot of sense to me personally, and then you had all of the other practical shooting ability with the other cartridges which of course included the .45 ACP.

 

[Creek Henry]

The same reason the 45 super, 10mm, and 10mm magnum don't sell a lot. If you want reliable power, you get a revolver not an over powered SA. SAs have too many moving parts and variables so they work best in a narrow power range. Also, people want shootability over power usually.

 

[Willie Lowman]

Creek nailed it.

I want .44 magnum power, I reach for my .44 magnum.

The .460 is a cool idea, but it could never give the versatility that a .44 mag revolver can.

 

[trkkshotbry]

If it only lets my steel 1911 frame last 7-10,000 rounds then I'm OK with that. Because of the price of 460 ammo I probably wouldn't shoot it often or much. Rifle actions are much more robust and would last forever if properly maintained. Better metallurgy could be developed to extend service life, or recoil buffering mechanisms.
I'm still captivated by the idea. I really dig amazing power in small packages and while I agree that the revolver platform is better suited to developing max power loads ala Elmer Kieth, eventually someone will want more than 6 shots in an auto cocker format. I'm that guy.

 

[WESHOOT2]

easy answer; try one

Then report back on its ease of carry, its recoil signature, and ammo expense

 

[HiBC]

Remember the magazine is the same length.The fact that the brass is a little longer does not mean the cartridge length gets longer.

The bullet mfgr's have not created a 460 Roland bullet.

IMO,a heavy bear type handgun needs to have heavy bullet capability.

Mag Tec makes a 230 gr FMJ flat point,SWC.Cant use it in a 460,too much bullet nose hanging out.

Sure,you can get high vel with 200 gr HP type bullets,you will not get much penetration.

There are a few revolver bullets that work out in the 255 gr level.A custom mold is an option.

You can have a successful 460 Roland,it can be done.It has been done.

There are some devils in the details.

 

[BOBA FETT]

id say it hasnt really caught on becuase most people want the convenience of going to a store or dealer and buying the ammo they want off the shelf....and most people dont reload or make custom ammo either...

 

[csmsss]

The Rowland never caught on because it was the answer to a question no one was asking. Why would anyone buy a semi-auto firing a limited production, proprietary cartridge, especially when you could buy a Desert Eagle in .50AE or .44 magnum if you're looking for that sort of power level? Made no sense then, makes no sense now.

 

[Ben Dover]

I would say that it hasn't been successful due to lack of general appeal. In other words, nost shooters see no need for it. It is far too specialized.

 

[JohnKSa]

Its an awesome cartridge in 45acp sized package delivering 44mag or better performance.

Because not many people want .44Mag performance out of a .45ACP sized package.

Even .357Mag performance out of a .45ACP sized package is obviously more than most shooters want, or the 10mm would be a LOT more popular than it is.

 

[KyJim]

Even .357Mag performance out of a .45ACP sized package is obviously more than most shooters want, or the 10mm would be a LOT more popular than it is.

In addition, to me, the felt recoil of a 10mm in a 1911 is more than a .357 magnum out of either a K-frame or N-frame Smith. Not outrageous by any means, but it's there.

 

[Ole 5 hole group]

To my way of thinking, far too many handgun folks view the 1911 platform as a self-defense platform only, and don't think a 45ACP cartridge is capable of killing a whitetail.

Some handgunners actually hunt big-game with the 1911 in 45ACP, 45 Super and the 460 Rowland and do as well as those using the 44 mag, 45 Colt, 454 Casul, the Linebaugh models and the S&W big boys. They just use a properly constructed bullet and place the bullet in the kill zone - really pretty simple.

Now the 460 Rowland can be a little expensive because it isn't main-stream yet and probably never will be, but for some it's the way to go. The 460 Rowland can be loaded with 45 ACP cartridges, which are less expensive and can be loaded to handle about anything that walks on the North American Continent - you can also spend a little more money and use 45 Super brass and up the ante quite a bit relative to velocity if you feel the need and then of course, you have the option of the 460 Rowland bad boy.

I'm set-up for the 45 Super, which is all I need (want would be the correct term) but if I had a desire to go the 460 Rowland route, I think I would use the Glock 21 platform and drop in a nice match type trigger, but each to his own.

 

[RsqVet]

I think it's a number of reasons....

Comped pistols or revolvers never seem all that popular in general

The power level is above what most people care to mess with in a semi

One pretty much must hand load or have a big bank account to buy ammo

If one is a hand loader loading for a semi at those power levels has more potential for issues than loading for a revolver.

Defensive experts teach us that we should "prove" our semi-auto with a min of 200 rounds of carry ammo. That will get expensive and perhaps wrist wearying with the 460. Esp. if one has a "woods" and "town" load as many of us do with a hiking / wood / trail gun.

Ammo availability

Cost -- compare the cost of a new or used 3-4 inch large bore revolver with a quality 1911 in 460 plus ammo / reloading dies etc.

Longterm durability / longevity of the gun... not saying that one can not build a durable 460 but it is more than likely going to cost more than a big bore revolver from Smith or Ruger

About the only pluses I seen in a 460 is better packability and the faster follow up / ergonomics of the 1911.

Guessing that the positives don't outweigh all of the downsides for most people.

With all of that being said, for someone who is so inclined I see merit in the 460. A comped 5 inch 1911 is something I would carry afield if is so desired, a Desert Eagle no so much based on size and weight.

 

[kcub]

A .45 Super can also shoot .45 ACP.
Is the same true of .460 Rowland?

 

[CurlyQ.Howard]

Yes. A .460 Rowland can shoot .45 ACP.

 

[Nathan]

Can a ramped 45 Auto be rechambered to 460 Rowland? Thinking a 6" longslide would make a nice base for this.

 

[HiBC]

I'm pretty sure it would not be correct to shoot 45 ACP in a 460 Roland.The reason:These handguns headspace on the case mouth.The .460 Roland case is significantly longer than the .45 ACP case.

And,on the question of ramped bbl...Be careful with choosing a ramped 45 .

A ramped 38 Super works great,but consider,the top of the mag is in the same location when inserted in the pistol.So,the center axis of of a 45 ACP,or Roland,is lower than it is on a 38 Super.

That means its easier for the underside of the 38 Super bullet ogive to find ramp to ride up.

If your .460 Roland is to be a stopper,you may want a large ,flat meplat on your bullet.Between the lower center axis and the lower edge of a large meplat,it may not feed high enough to find ramp to ride up.

Then you have to start special tuning mag feed lips to elevate the bullet.To each his own...

 

[Ruger45LC]

Proprietary cartridges rarely catch on and become popular. While the Rowland is marketed for power, I think that's it's downside too.

It's understandable to want power in a pistol, but there is a point where you can have too much of a good thing. For one, recoil is stiff. I haven't even shot one but I do load for the .45 Super which will throw a 230gr around 1250, a 250 around 1200 and a 275gr hardcast around 1150 fps from a 5" comped barrel.

Think about it, how many people complain about .40 S&W recoil? LOTS. Some even think the .45 ACP has a lot, a .45 Super or 460 Rowland has quite a bit more than either.

Second, even though it's "fun" to shoot 185-200-230 JHP bullets faster, it's not a good idea because these bullets are designed for typical .45 ACP velocity. Sure they can withstand a little extra velocity, but pushing them 50%+ faster doesn't make it better. The Rowland (and even the .45 Super) really shine when using heavier .45 Colt style bullets, but at that point feedability can become a little bit of an issue due to their blunt revolver profiles. If you look at those who have invested in the 460R, a good number of them have reliability issues.

My typical response to someone interested in the Rowland is, just use your .45 ACP (as long as it's barrel has good support) and shoot .45 Super. It's a touch slower than the Rowland but it's more than enough. My 275gr hardcast at 1150 pumps out 800 ft-lbs. Even the .45 ACP can toss a 250gr hardcast at 1000 fps, which is in itself more than enough for 99% of all situations.