I have "done my homework" and am going to lay out the "long green" required to purchase a Charter Arms Pitbull (2.5" barreled, 22 ounce, medium framed 'no-moon-clip) .45 ACP revolver.  I am looking forward to shooting this one. After watching a video review, I am convinced that this will be a "big-bore" blaster.

I am hoping that it will shoot as well as my 1991 Charter Arms stainless steel 3" barreled revolver. If it does, I will be "sitting in tall cotton".

I understand that with the short-barreled revolver that I will be robbed of the velocity normally associated with the self-loading handguns that are chambered for the cartridge. (I presume that I will see velocities that are usually attributed to the self loading 1911-type pistols with a 3" barrel).

When I carry this little revolver, should I use FMJ, or will i gain sufficient velocities to attain both penetration and expansion, or should i rely on penetration alone?

Any input, opinions?

185 grain Hornady critical defense

Quote from: sqlbullet on February 11 2016 09:45:30 PM MST
185 grain Hornady critical defense

What kind of velocities I can expect from the 2.5" barreled revolver? I am presuming to extract approximately the same velocities that one could expect from a 3" barreled self-loader.

Is this, or is this not, correct?

Quote from: Captain O on February 11 2016 11:18:33 PM MST

Quote from: sqlbullet on February 11 2016 09:45:30 PM MST
185 grain Hornady critical defense

What kind of velocities I can expect from the 2.5" barreled revolver? I am presuming to extract approximately the same velocities that one could expect from a 3" barreled self-loader.

Is this, or is this not, correct?

To presume (assume), is to guess. Revolver to pistol barrel length velocities tend to track very closely (despite mythical beliefs). However, any difference is insignificant. Unless you are loading your own, it just doesn't matter. 500-600 FPS is essentially the same, as far as bullet performance goes, which is the best you will see with factory ammo. You can gain some of it back if you load your own. Off the shelf ammo is tested and published in 5"+ barrels. I don't often disagree with SQL, but heavy is better, with a belly gun (which is essentially what you are talking about). Err on the side of mass, in my humble (experienced) opinion. The lighter bullets offer a higher FPE, but the Taylor KO factors in sectional density, which is equally (if not more) important. Fast pencil or slow sledge hammer. What's your objective?

My objective(s)?

a) Accuracy.

b) Penetration.

c) CNS disruption.

d) As much internal organ damage/disruption as possible.

If I shoot someone, my intent is to stop them. (When they are dead, they have been stopped).

Does this make sense? Excellent! (I thought it might).

Sounds like a good job for the old Speer 200 grain "flying ashtray". 

Quote from: Captain O on February 12 2016 07:51:45 AM MST
My objective(s)?

a) Accuracy.

b) Penetration.

c) CNS disruption.

d) As much internal organ damage/disruption as possible.

If I shoot someone, my intent is to stop them. (When they are dead, they have been stopped).

Does this make sense? Excellent! (I thought it might).

None of this is objective, really, especially the last. Subjective objectives leave too much to the wind, individual skill, and pure luck. All but the last can be, and has been, accomplished with a .22LR Derringer. The last would require something on the level of .50 BMG (just a guess, but shot placement is still a factor). Accuracy at 3 feet is irrelevant (we are talking about a belly gun). Penetration relies on too many factors to establish a standard. CNS disruption is easily accomplished by almost any means, with optimal shot placement.

My "objective" question was asking, "where, and under what conditions would this be applied?". What's the mission?

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45auto2.html

900-930 fps. Keep in mind their barrel length includes chamber and yours doesn't.  2.5 + 1.25" chamber = 3.75" for comparison.  Look at the real world tests they did.  926, 930 and 937 from the 3.75" Auto barrels.  Loss to a  .006" cylinder gap is usually within the standard deviation for a 10 round group.

Perhaps I am confused. My calculations were based upon the highest velocity loss for the physical scenario. (I have a habit of being conservative in my approximations). A 2.5" barrel with a 1/2" allowance for the cylinder.

Hmmmmmm...

A 45 ACP has a COAL of 1.275".  At a minimum that would have to be added to the barrel length.

According to this article the Pitbull has a cylinder length of 1.62".  That would mean a 2.5" barrel would have the same muzzle to breech length as a 4" 1911.  Since the ballistics by the inch tests are using a contender style setup and are actual measurements of the barrel, your gun would actually equate to a 4.120" barrel in their tests.

As far as the effects of cylinder gap on distance, it has been tested and debunked ad nauseam, but still persists. Cylinder gap only becomes consistently meaningful in barrels over 5" length.  I would refer you to this page on the BBTI site.

If you look at the lines for barrel lengths of 5", 4", 3" and 2" you will note that only the 4" had a linear progression down.  The 5" and 3" were both faster with a gap than without, and the 2" bounced around.  This means that cylinder gap has so little influence in barrels of this length as to not merit consideration, as other variables have a bigger influence.

900-1100 fps is plenty fast enough for good expansion in a 45 ACP hollowpoint, and the 185 grain loads all get you there in a 4" breech to muzzle length, which is what you have.

Thank you. I wasn't sure. Now I can buy the Pitbull and not worry about having "more muzzle flash than perfromance". Thank God! At least my faith in a .45 ACP short-barreled revolver isn't completely misplaced. The way I have it figured, is that I won't have to shoot too many times to bring a horrific encounter toan abrupt conclusion. (If two rounds stop a single assailant, I'll have three more to dissuade his partner).

Again, Squlbullet I thank you.

BTW, the cartridge retention/ejection "system" is on the revolver's extractor star. The "star" is thick and has springs inside, holding the retainer "fingers" outward. This was an engineering "masterpiece".

In case anyone is interested, mine will cost me $465.00 OTD.

The wait begins.

Here's a review:

http://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2015/08/charter-arms-new-pitbull-revolver-in-45-acp/#charter-arms-pitbull-45-acp-1

I've always thought the Pitbull would make a nice 10mm, in .45 it seems there is tons of space between the chambers in the cylinder.