# .45 Schofield



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

I just started loading some .45 schofield and have had a heck of a time finding data for it. I ran a search for schofield on the forum and turned up nothing. I guess that's to be expected for a technically obsolete cartridge. 

Anyway, I have a Taurus Raging Bull .454 Casull that I've decided to use on big game in the future. I want to practice a lot with this gun if I'm going to try longer range shots. I have no problem with the recoil of a .454, I just don't want to spend that kind of money every time I target shoot. 

I was going to load .45 Colt for my practice rounds, but brass of any kind is so hard to find right now. I came across a few hundred cases of Schofield and figured it would be even more economical for plinking. I realize the ballistics and POI will be totally different than the Casull, but right now I'm focused on just becoming proficient with the revolver at long ranges. I will definitely practice with .454 before I attempt to hunt with it. 

My biggest problem is that there is extremely limited Schofield data as far as powder goes. The manuals I read will have 15 or 20 powders listed for a given round and maybe five listed for a .45 Schofield. And of course they're always powders I can't find. 

So I took some Colt data and reduced it volumetrically for the Schofield, hoping the pressures were safe. That's a tricky game to play when there isn't even SAAMI specs for that round :?. I've got a huge supply of Hi-Skor 800-x and it really shines in other handgun loads I've tried, so I started there. 

I stayed pretty low charge-wise. I used 6 grains for the first batch and 7 for the next. First batch performed well but was very mild. 7 grains looked good too, but again very mild. I want to know how far I can push this round but I guess I really need a chronograph to judge where I'm at.

Is there anyone here that has experience with the Schofield or using 800-x in a .45 colt or similar rounds? Hoping someone will be able to help.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Quick google search trolled up:



> The Hodgdon Annual Manual from 2003 has the following data for the .45 Schofield:
> 
> Bullet: 230RNFP DIA.: .452"
> Powder.....StartWT..Vel...Pres-CUP./.MaxWt...Vel...Pres
> ...


-DallanC


----------



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

Thanks DallanC, that looks to be the same as what my Hogdon's manual shows. That brings up another question I had though... And this is all hypothetical, I don't plan to try anything stupid, but the pressures shown for the Schofield are between 11-13k. I'm firing these out of a gun chambered in .454, which maxes out around 60,000 cup. So, I know the firearm is up to the task, but if I were to start pushing my charges higher, what would be the first problem I ran into?(assuming I'm shooting jacketed bullets so fouling wouldn't be an issue)
Would It be a case failure? Or something worse?


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Do you have a chronograph? If so, load your Schofield cases to published velocities for starting loads in the 45 Colt and be happy. I would start with loads about 10% lower than the starting loads for the Colt, and go up until I reached the Colt the velocities I was looking for. There is no reason to search for the fastest and flattest shooting load in that cartridge.

Historical note: The Schofield round was used in place of the 45 Colt after the Army adopted the Schofield revolver. The Colt round was too long for the Schofield, but the Schofield round could be fired in the Colt revolver. In a common sense move, uncommon for the military, they decided to supply the shorter round that could be fired in both guns, as opposed to trying to supply two different 45 caliber handgun rounds. This is why we have people erroneously calling the 45 Colt the "long colt" when there is officially no such cartridge.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

One thing to note when you are firing a shorter cartridge in one that also handles the longer ones such as what you are doing, is that you need to pay attention to cleaning the cylinder more than usual due to lead build up to the point that the longer one will not chamber. I have seen this happen with .357 magnums where the owner shot a lot of lead .38 specials in them and a couple of .44 magnums where they shot .44 specials.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

The Hodgdon site lists a load with IMR Tail Boss (listed as .45 S&W). I use Trail Boss in my .45 Colts almost exclusively now days. And... I actually see Trail Boss for sale occasionally.


----------



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

Loke said:


> Historical note: The Schofield round was used in place of the 45 Colt after the Army adopted the Schofield revolver. The Colt round was too long for the Schofield, but the Schofield round could be fired in the Colt revolver. In a common sense move, uncommon for the military, they decided to supply the shorter round that could be fired in both guns, as opposed to trying to supply two different 45 caliber handgun rounds. This is why we have people erroneously calling the 45 Colt the "long colt" when there is officially no such cartridge.


Settling on using the shorter Schofield ammo in both was a good compromise, but the real common sense move would have been to avoid the S&W Model 3 all together as it was near impossible to reload on a moving horse and the Schofield round had inferior ballistics. The more I read about the historical weapons choices of the military the more it seems like they were playing a guessing game.

I don't have a chronograph yet, that's next on my list though. I understand that theres no practical reason to push this round any faster than the published data, and doing so would defeat my purpose of using it as an economical practice round. I guess I just got carried away wondering what the possibilities were.

And Critter, I've seen that happening in my .454 already after about 30 rounds. Gets it dirty fast. I've noticed that the outside of the Schofield cases are much dirtier after firing than the Casull brass. Could that be that the Casull's higher pressure seals the chamber better and prevents blowback?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Last Man Standing said:


> And Critter, I've seen that happening in my .454 already after about 30 rounds. Gets it dirty fast. I've noticed that the outside of the Schofield cases are much dirtier after firing than the Casull brass. Could that be that the Casull's higher pressure seals the chamber better and prevents blowback?


I doubt that is the problem in your case, I have experienced the same thing shooting full power .44 magnum loads. What I was actually talking about is the difference in size for the shorter rounds as compared to the round that the pistol is chambered for. If you look at the chamber of the cylinder of your .454 you will notice that there is a difference in diameter towards the end of the cylinder. When you load the .454 case it will take up all of the space that is intended for the .454, then when you load a shorter case there is a small gap that lead can be deposited in that will prevent you from loading a longer case until the cylinder is cleaned of the deposit.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

The S&W model 3 and the Schofield are not one and the same. The locking latch on the Schofield was changed to allow easier unlocking while mounted. The Schofield revolver was a lot easier to unload while mounted than the Peacemaker. You can do it with one hand. Not so with the Colt. And with a little dexterity, you can get two rounds in the cylinder at a time, not so with the Colt. And the Schofield round had the same ballistics as the 45 ACP, and I don't hear that one being called "underpowered".


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Cool info on the scofields.


-DallanC


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

If you want to play with one, we have a reproduction one down at the store. That one is chambered for the 45 Colt.


----------



## Last Man Standing (Dec 7, 2011)

Loke said:


> If you want to play with one, we have a reproduction one down at the store. That one is chambered for the 45 Colt.


That is awesome, it's always fun to look at historic guns.



Loke said:


> The S&W model 3 and the Schofield are not one and the same. The locking latch on the Schofield was changed to allow easier unlocking while mounted. The Schofield revolver was a lot easier to unload while mounted than the Peacemaker. You can do it with one hand. Not so with the Colt. And with a little dexterity, you can get two rounds in the cylinder at a time, not so with the Colt. And the Schofield round had the same ballistics as the 45 ACP, and I don't hear that one being called "underpowered".


What I have read says that the Schofield is very much a S&W Model 3. It's not the one and only Model 3, but a variation designed by George Schofield to be superior to the previous versions. His improvements were basically case hardening the parts for the latch mechanism and having it chambered in .45 Schofield. Major George Schofield held a patent on this design and profited from sales of the revolver. Coincidentally, his brother John Schofield, sat as the head of the Army Ordnance Board, in charge of reviewing and selecting all arms to be used by that branch. There's a fair chance that nepotism played a part in the adoption of that firearm.


----------

