Hunting Grizzly with the 45-70

MiG25 said:
I think that is an oft repeated myth. Cartridges were scarce and expensive and the well being of one's family depended upon success.
Click to expand...

Not so much with grizzly and bison, neither were high on the "survival meat" scale. Moose,deer,elk maybe a different story.
One thing everyone seems to forget is that maybe the actual reason these calibers were used is because nothing else was really available? The same reason they rode their horse to town and not the F150.
 
If a guy has a 45-70 as his main hunting rifle and knows the rifle and cartridge limitations why not use what you know and love
Same thing can apply to any rifle or caliber a grizzly hunt is sumthing special and you shood use your Favorite rifle just my opinion
 
Last edited:
hoytcanon said:
There is no doubt in my mind that a modern loading in a 45/70 will cleanly and effectively kill a grizzly... "IF," the user respects the limitations of the cartridge/load, their own accuracy limitations, and places the bullet well. Twer it me, I would be aiming at the lungs, perhaps with the offside shoulder as a backdrop, as Ardent suggests, and allowing for a "white-knuckled" and hopefully "short" bloodtrail.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of minimum range limitations; a point of the shoulder shot at 15 yards should fulfill the dreams of any adrenaline junky, whether he packs a .45/70 or .460 Weatherby. If you're paying for the thrills, the thrills should be available for you, provided you understand, and willingly accept the risks. Over a long day on a difficult trail, I know which one I'd sooner carry, and at the moment of truth, with my own handloads, either would solve the problem. Since I've underwritten my well being with a .44 belt gun, a .45/70 sounds pretty good.
 
bearkilr said:
Not so much with grizzly and bison, neither were high on the "survival meat" scale. Moose,deer,elk maybe a different story.
One thing everyone seems to forget is that maybe the actual reason these calibers were used is because nothing else was really available? The same reason they rode their horse to town and not the F150.
Click to expand...

A bear was a valuable animal to both White Man and Indian. Buffalo hunting was a thing of the past before smokeless powder came out.

Of course they used what they had, the 30 WCF killed and buried all those old cartridges.

Th 45-70 wouldn't be my first choice for anything (if it were I'd own one), but let's get real, there's nothing controversial about hunting Grizzly with one.
 
Slamfire said:
Likely has something to do with...

balls_7_zpspdpy8ijg.jpg


;)
Click to expand...

I've never shot a Bear, I am just sorta following with interest.
But sooner or later the imaginary line between 'I've got balls' and 'That's just stupid' gets crossed, eh. If I used my 38-55, would my ball's be bigger than your's? It is smaller and less powerful than a 45-70.
Or is that just stupid?
Perhaps the equating lesser caliber's to masculinity is somewhat silly?
 
tokguy said:
I've never shot a Bear, I am just sorta following with interest.
But sooner or later the imaginary line between 'I've got balls' and 'That's just stupid' gets crossed, eh.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the line between "courageous" and "stupid" can only be seen in restrospect...
 
To continue the fun pose as a client and ask any grizzly outfitter for their suggestion on chamberings. You'll cut through the opinion and sentiment portions and get what works best, as that's all we're worried about. You'll get a short list that will look a lot like this,

"Do you have an elk rifle?"

YES-------------------------NO


Use That - Get a .30-06/7RM/300/338.
 
hoytcanon said:
Doubly agree...

Just waiting for someone to trot out Bella again, like that is somehow relevant.
Click to expand...

I'll give you relevant when I was a teenager I read a book called "I Nuligak" a true story about an Eskimo living in the 1800's if I remember correctly.

He somehow acquired a rifle chambered in the new high powered round 22 Short.

He would shoot polar bears between the shoulder blades paralysing them worked better than trying to spear them.

Like the earlier post showed he had balls...

Edit to add = on my last grizzly hunt yes I had my 21" barreled 375RUM along as well but I mostly carried my single shot 21" barreled T/C Contender carbine chambered in 375JDJ = 260gr Accubonds @ 2300fps.

I would have aimed for a max 150 - 200 yards double lung shot.
 
Last edited:
Camp Cook said:
I'll give you relevant when I was a teenager I read a book called "I Nuligak" a true story about an Eskimo living in the 1800's if I remember correctly.

He somehow acquired a rifle chambered in the new high powered round 22 Short.

He would shoot polar bears between the shoulder blades paralysing them worked better than trying to spear them.

Like the earlier post showed he had balls...
Click to expand...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom