[bikerdog]

So I am considering a new build. This build will be for 3 matching guns and will most likely be heavily customized. I was going to put together 3 matching glock 20's in 10mm. While planning this build the 460 has come up a lot in discussions.

Here's the question I have for the group. Does anyone here have long term experience with the glock 21 and the 460 rowland.

My main concern is of the frame and gun breaking down due to recoil. These guns will have slide mounted RMR red dots. The purpose of these guns will be for back up guns in bear country and the 460 sounds like the best option provided that the recoil is not so much as to destroy the gun and sight.

Any ideas and or advice would be appreciated.

PS the conversion would most likely be the Lone Wolf conversion simply because they seem like they would be easier to change between the 460 and the 45 acp.


Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

 

[SDGlock23]

Although much of the talk goes towards the Rowland, the .45 Super shouldn't be overlooked, depending on a few things. The Super has the same external dimensions as the ACP but can be loaded to 460 Rowland specs, the only thing is that you have to handload and use a comp to get there. The postive side is that shooting .45 ACP through the same setup feels about like shooting a .22 and you don't have to swap barrels. Some argue that you can shoot .45 ACP and Super from the Rowland barrel but I personally wouldn't advise that long term (BTW, some even use ACP brass to load to Rowland levels).

When you're talking about shooting a 185gr to 1600+ fps or a 250gr to 1300+ fps, recoil is stout even with a compensator and it's loud. I can't say for sure whether a RMR red dot would or wouldn't hold up, but I will say that in all honesty while it's fun to shoot 300gr hardcasts at 1150 fps from a G21 with .45 Super/Rowland, I certainly wouldn't want to shoot a LOT of them as wear and tear on the gun is definitely going to be increased, the recoil alone will give that away.

If you don't handload then the 460 Rowland makes more sense in a way, but either way recoil is defintely more than a 10mm.

 

[Trigger Finger]

I have a S&W 4506 that I converted to 45 Super and it handles Super and ACP perfectly and is fun to shoot. However I don't handload anymore and I converted my Glock 21 to handle 460 Rowland and it works great!

I use a Delta Compensator and ammo from Buffalo Bore and Underwood. It works very, very good and is as powerful as a mid range 44 Magnum.

I use a Lone Wolf 6.5 inch 460 barrel with threaded end and Wolf 24 lb. Springs. It's also very accurate but I develop a flinch after about 20 to 30 rounds in a row. I only put about 100 to 150 rounds of 460 Rowland ammo through it a year and replace the recoil spring every year and have not seen any noticeable wear on the gun.

I prefer the 255 grain Hard Lead Bullet Loads in both 45 Super and 460 Rowland!!!

 

[bikerdog]

I have a S&W 4506 that I converted to 45 Super and it handles Super and ACP perfectly and is fun to shoot. However I don't handload anymore and I converted my Glock 21 to handle 460 Rowland and it works great!



I use a Delta Compensator and ammo from Buffalo Bore and Underwood. It works very, very good and is as powerful as a mid range 44 Magnum.



I use a Lone Wolf 6.5 inch 460 barrel with threaded end and Wolf 24 lb. Springs. It's also very accurate but I develop a flinch after about 20 to 30 rounds in a row. I only put about 100 to 150 rounds of 460 Rowland ammo through it a year and replace the recoil spring every year and have not seen any noticeable wear on the gun.



I prefer the 255 grain Hard Lead Bullet Loads in both 45 Super and 460 Rowland!!!

That's exactly the type of insight I was hoping for. The reality is these will normally be firing 45 acp and probably only get 100-200 rounds of rowland a year. There main load in the rowland will be the 255 gr cast lead.

That said its a huge investment and I want to make sure I get as much feedback as possible before going forward with it.

Thx for the replies folks.






Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

 

[bigbe]

I have a Glock 21, a 30, and a 29 (two 45 acps and a 10mm respectively).

I converted my 21 to .460 Rowland using the Lonewolf kit. I have fired .45 acp through the .460 chambered barrel without incident but, the fact remains, it's not head spacing on the case mouth. That being said, I am gradually coming to the conclusion that the gun, once converted to .460 Rowland, should primarily be fed .460 Rowland ammo. This headspacing issue is a subject that I would love to discuss with more experienced reloaders/shooters. I get that it can be done but the question is, should it?

Aside from all of that, after having shot some .460 through it, I see no reason to shoot .45 acp through it anyways other than I have a ton of .45 acp ammo and components. .460 Rowland is awesome. If you are concerned with beating the **** out of your gun, load them down a bit and reserve the heavy stuff for special occasions.

My only complaint is that you have to loc tite the compensator on to the barrel so, realistically, you can't go back and forth between your original barrel and the conversion barrel, not quickly anyways. The set screw sets on a flat on the barrel. I'm thinking it would be better if it was set within a detent hole tapped into the threads by a competent gun smith.

Incidentally, believe it or not, it was a lot easier (and cheaper) for me to get .460 Rowland reloading components than 10 mm auto components-brass specifically. Starline has an ample supply of shiny new .460 Rowland brass and nobody has shiny new 10 mm auto brass from what I have seen.

 

[hansgruber]

I have a Glock 21, a 30, and a 29 (two 45 acps and a 10mm respectively).

I converted my 21 to .460 Rowland using the Lonewolf kit. I have fired .45 acp through the .460 chambered barrel without incident but, the fact remains, it's not head spacing on the case mouth. That being said, I am gradually coming to the conclusion that the gun, once converted to .460 Rowland, should primarily be fed .460 Rowland ammo. This headspacing issue is a subject that I would love to discuss with more experienced reloaders/shooters. I get that it can be done but the question is, should it?

Aside from all of that, after having shot some .460 through it, I see no reason to shoot .45 acp through it anyways other than I have a ton of .45 acp ammo and components. .460 Rowland is awesome. If you are concerned with beating the **** out of your gun, load them down a bit and reserve the heavy stuff for special occasions.

My only complaint is that you have to loc tite the compensator on to the barrel so, realistically, you can't go back and forth between your original barrel and the conversion barrel, not quickly anyways. The set screw sets on a flat on the barrel. I'm thinking it would be better if it was set within a detent hole tapped into the threads by a competent gun smith.

Incidentally, believe it or not, it was a lot easier (and cheaper) for me to get .460 Rowland reloading components than 10 mm auto components-brass specifically. Starline has an ample supply of shiny new .460 Rowland brass and nobody has shiny new 10 mm auto brass from what I have seen.

Bigbe: It is entirely possible and SAFE to chamber and fire the .45 ACP and .45 Super from a .460 Rowland chamber in the guns that have been to date chambered for the Rowland.
The reason is something called "controlled feed." In the 1911 and absolutely in the G21, the round is fed in such a way that the case rim is "captured" by the extractor just as the rim comes up from the magazine. At this point in the feed cycle a portion of the cartridge has already entered the chamber so the "side load" of the extractor trying to pull one side of the round out is cancelled by the chamber which will not permit the cartridge to move out from under the extractor.

A MYTH has taken hold in the semiautomatic pistol world that one can only fire rounds with case mouths that exactly match the chamber ream. This is absolutely WRONG and NOT TRUE, and a MYTH, that I am sure I will never dispel by making all caps statements on this forum...but it ain't true.

Some .45 ACP ammo IS "roll crimped" and it feeds BETTER and fires just fine. .40 S&W will chamber and feed in the 10mm everyday of the week including Sunday...as will .45 ACP cases in a .460 Rowland chamber. This of course PROVES that the named pistols are CONTROLLED FEED at ALL TIMES!

But just say for the sake of ignorance we pretend a round might once or twice get "bump fed" into the chamber....a .40 would seat FAR to deep to be hit by the firing pin...so too would the .45 ACP in a Rowland chamber. Basically, if it "goes bang" it's headspaced RIGHT ON THE BREECH FACE. If it does NOT go bang it's too far into the chamber to be reached by a firing pin. This is factually HOW the 1911 and Glock (and XD) auto pistols "chamber."

Now, AR's do INDEED "bump feed" their rounds - but that's another case entirely.

Even when you THINK you're "headspacing on the case mouth" you are IN FACT headspacing directly on the cartridge BASE! PERIOD.

In fact, you can easily read VOLUMES written by people talking about BREAKING EXTRACTORS due to excessive "dropping" of a slide on a round dropped into the chamber forcing the (1911) extractor to make an extreme flexion in order to snap over the rim of the round as the slide comes home. 1911's simply DO NOT BUMP FEED! And they do not like to have their slide slammed shut on a chambered round because it can damage the extractor!

Also, GLOCKS DO NOT BUMP FEED! So all this talk about headspacing being "off" because of ANY variance at the case mouth is invalid to put it politely.

Where you WILL have a problem with ANY auto pistol case is failing to TRIM them so they end up several thousandths "over" which means the slide will be closed and the case base and web portion are sticking out a bit too far....a POSSIBLE pressure/safety issue, but I say POSSIBLE because more often than not, over-long cases hold the slide back just far enough to activate the gun's out of battery safety and the round won't fire....

The fact IS when someone uses a "spec" case trimmer or trim system they trim the case several thousandths SHORT...which means it really doesn't index on the mouth! We're only talking a few thousandths here...even ONE-THOUSANDTHS "short" means your case is NOT INDEXING on the chamber ledge but is IN FACT indexing by use of controlled feed beneath the extractor!

The ONLY reason one might not be able to feed a shorter than chambered for round is magazine length, feed distance, ramp angle, and magazine feed lip length....of course this DOES NOT APPLY to the .460 Rowland because the OAL of .45 ACP, .45 Super, and .460 Rowland is IDENTICAL! The ONLY difference is case length and pressure loading.

EMPIRICAL testing in a variety of Glock 10mm's has proven that the 3.6mm shorter .40 S&W case plus loaded bullet WILL FEED perfectly fine in any and all 10mm chambers...it CANNOT result in an overpressure because the .40 S&W is generally loaded quite mildly, but also because it is perfectly "captured" by the extractor during the feed cycle...this is EASILY tested for anyone who desires to operate from FACTS versus "what somebody tole me."

I apologize if I have given offense to anyone.

 

[happie2shoot]

Bigbe: It is entirely possible and SAFE to chamber and fire the .45 ACP and .45 Super from a .460 Rowland chamber in the guns that have been to date chambered for the Rowland.
The reason is something called "controlled feed." In the 1911 and absolutely in the G21, the round is fed in such a way that the case rim is "captured" by the extractor just as the rim comes up from the magazine. At this point in the feed cycle a portion of the cartridge has already entered the chamber so the "side load" of the extractor trying to pull one side of the round out is cancelled by the chamber which will not permit the cartridge to move out from under the extractor.

A MYTH has taken hold in the semiautomatic pistol world that one can only fire rounds with case mouths that exactly match the chamber ream. This is absolutely WRONG and NOT TRUE, and a MYTH, that I am sure I will never dispel by making all caps statements on this forum...but it ain't true.

Some .45 ACP ammo IS "roll crimped" and it feeds BETTER and fires just fine. .40 S&W will chamber and feed in the 10mm everyday of the week including Sunday...as will .45 ACP cases in a .460 Rowland chamber. This of course PROVES that the named pistols are CONTROLLED FEED at ALL TIMES!

But just say for the sake of ignorance we pretend a round might once or twice get "bump fed" into the chamber....a .40 would seat FAR to deep to be hit by the firing pin...so too would the .45 ACP in a Rowland chamber. Basically, if it "goes bang" it's headspaced RIGHT ON THE BREECH FACE. If it does NOT go bang it's too far into the chamber to be reached by a firing pin. This is factually HOW the 1911 and Glock (and XD) auto pistols "chamber."

Now, AR's do INDEED "bump feed" their rounds - but that's another case entirely.

Even when you THINK you're "headspacing on the case mouth" you are IN FACT headspacing directly on the cartridge BASE! PERIOD.

In fact, you can easily read VOLUMES written by people talking about BREAKING EXTRACTORS due to excessive "dropping" of a slide on a round dropped into the chamber forcing the (1911) extractor to make an extreme flexion in order to snap over the rim of the round as the slide comes home. 1911's simply DO NOT BUMP FEED! And they do not like to have their slide slammed shut on a chambered round because it can damage the extractor!

Also, GLOCKS DO NOT BUMP FEED! So all this talk about headspacing being "off" because of ANY variance at the case mouth is invalid to put it politely.

Where you WILL have a problem with ANY auto pistol case is failing to TRIM them so they end up several thousandths "over" which means the slide will be closed and the case base and web portion are sticking out a bit too far....a POSSIBLE pressure/safety issue, but I say POSSIBLE because more often than not, over-long cases hold the slide back just far enough to activate the gun's out of battery safety and the round won't fire....

The fact IS when someone uses a "spec" case trimmer or trim system they trim the case several thousandths SHORT...which means it really doesn't index on the mouth! We're only talking a few thousandths here...even ONE-THOUSANDTHS "short" means your case is NOT INDEXING on the chamber ledge but is IN FACT indexing by use of controlled feed beneath the extractor!

The ONLY reason one might not be able to feed a shorter than chambered for round is magazine length, feed distance, ramp angle, and magazine feed lip length....of course this DOES NOT APPLY to the .460 Rowland because the OAL of .45 ACP, .45 Super, and .460 Rowland is IDENTICAL! The ONLY difference is case length and pressure loading.

EMPIRICAL testing in a variety of Glock 10mm's has proven that the 3.6mm shorter .40 S&W case plus loaded bullet WILL FEED perfectly fine in any and all 10mm chambers...it CANNOT result in an overpressure because the .40 S&W is generally loaded quite mildly, but also because it is perfectly "captured" by the extractor during the feed cycle...this is EASILY tested for anyone who desires to operate from FACTS versus "what somebody tole me."

I apologize if I have given offense to anyone.

the truth will set you free, and this is the truth.:wavey:

 

[TKM]

That's exactly the type of insight I was hoping for. The reality is these will normally be firing 45 acp and probably only get 100-200 rounds of rowland a year. There main load in the rowland will be the 255 gr cast lead.

That said its a huge investment and I want to make sure I get as much feedback as possible before going forward with it.

Thx for the replies folks.






Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

It's not a huge investment. It costs less than a reasonable 22 Auto.

It is a huge return on investment though.

 

[ilgunguygt]

I have a Glock 21, a 30, and a 29 (two 45 acps and a 10mm respectively).

I converted my 21 to .460 Rowland using the Lonewolf kit. I have fired .45 acp through the .460 chambered barrel without incident but, the fact remains, it's not head spacing on the case mouth. That being said, I am gradually coming to the conclusion that the gun, once converted to .460 Rowland, should primarily be fed .460 Rowland ammo. This headspacing issue is a subject that I would love to discuss with more experienced reloaders/shooters. I get that it can be done but the question is, should it?

Aside from all of that, after having shot some .460 through it, I see no reason to shoot .45 acp through it anyways other than I have a ton of .45 acp ammo and components. .460 Rowland is awesome. If you are concerned with beating the **** out of your gun, load them down a bit and reserve the heavy stuff for special occasions.

My only complaint is that you have to loc tite the compensator on to the barrel so, realistically, you can't go back and forth between your original barrel and the conversion barrel, not quickly anyways. The set screw sets on a flat on the barrel. I'm thinking it would be better if it was set within a detent hole tapped into the threads by a competent gun smith.

Incidentally, believe it or not, it was a lot easier (and cheaper) for me to get .460 Rowland reloading components than 10 mm auto components-brass specifically. Starline has an ample supply of shiny new .460 Rowland brass and nobody has shiny new 10 mm auto brass from what I have seen.

10 mm brass you say? You just haven't looked in the right corner of Al Gores internet!
http://www.missouribullet.com/details.php?prodId=187&category=16&secondary=&keywords=



Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

 

[bikerdog]

It's not a huge investment. It costs less than a reasonable 22 Auto.



It is a huge return on investment though.

Ya but these guns will be milled with RMR's. And I'm looking at building three of them. So ya it's a pretty penny.


Sent from my iPhone using Ohub Campfire

 

[my_old_glock]

Although much of the talk goes towards the Rowland, the .45 Super shouldn't be overlooked, depending on a few things. The Super has the same external dimensions as the ACP but can be loaded to 460 Rowland specs, the only thing is that you have to handload and use a comp to get there. ...

I think the standard 45 Super is more than enough for Bears. It has a little less power than 10mm. The Benefit of 10mm (in a Glock) is that the 10mm magazine holds 5 more rounds than a 45 magazine. If you only have a Glock 21 then 45 Super with a (LW) barrel that better supports the brass is a good alternative.

http://www.underwoodammo.com/45super.aspx

http://www.underwoodammo.com/10mmauto.aspx




.

 

[bigbe]

10 mm brass you say? You just haven't looked in the right corner of Al Gores
internet!

When I was last looking for 10 mm brass a month and a half ago, starline wasn't shipping any. Looks like they are now. I'm more interested in investing my money in .460 Rowland right now though and before I start reloading heavily for 10 mm, I want to get a fully supported barrel from lone wolf anyways. I'm carrying my 10 mm right now though (as I prepare to go out and pick up some .45 cal JHPs).

Bigbe: It is entirely possible and SAFE to chamber and fire the .45 ACP and
.45 Super from a .460 Rowland chamber in the guns that have been to date
chambered for the Rowland.

I have heard that the extractor holds the round securely enough to fire a shorter than normal round but I like a lot of consensus before I jump into things like this. I think I will mostly be shooting .460 through it regardless but that's just because it's so much more entertaining than .45 acp. I have the next week off to play with, er, further test and evaluate my .460 Rowland Glock 21. :supergrin: