45-70 Fun

['Boo]

There is a significant difference in actual recoil and perceived recoil. A hard surface with minimal surface area such as the OP's single shot with it's skinny crescent steel butt plate will transfer greater force per square inch than say the same rifle with a big cushy pad that spreads the force over a greater surface area. A thick resilient pad will also spread the force out over a longer time period which also lessens perceived recoil.

Stock design also plays into perceived recoil as a poor fitting stock can cause the rifle to rise up and "slap" a shooter in the face , or as I suspect in the OP's case, cause the rifle muzzle to move laterally and slip out of the shoulder pocket and onto the bicep.

The 45-70 should be thought of as 3 separate cartridges depending on the rifle they are fired out of. Most factory loads are very mild as they could potentially used in very old rifles that can't take the pressures of modern cartridges. At the top end are the Ruger #1, Winchester/Browning 1885 , and various Mauser builds. The difference in energy developed using a 400 grain bullet at ~1300 fps and 2100 fps is astounding The 400 grain bullet @ 1300 fps produces ~1500 foot pounds of energy. The same 400 grain bullet @2100 fps produces ~3900 foot pounds.

 

['Boo]

Double tap

 

[kodiakjack]

I agree with you entirely. Some people don't realize that velocity is also a factor in how that energy is felt. For example, given two identical rifles, equal muzzle energy but one shooting a lighter bullet at higher velocity, the rifle with the faster velocity will push back faster at the shooter, making the recoil feel a little snappier even though the same amount of energy is transferred . I think that may be where Smcx is confused.

Jim

I’d go one further to say speed is THE factor in how recoil (or anything really) is felt.

The example I usually use is the baseball and the train. Hold out your hand and catch a 90mph fast ball, and with the other hand, reach out and high-five a train coasting at 5mph. The train has a million times more energy than the baseball, but which one hurts more?

Having a heavier rifle helps to reduce recoil, but it’s not as simple as double the weight, half the recoil because of the squared velocity factor. For example, a 6 pound, unrestrained rifle that imparts a bullet with 3200ftlbs of energy will move rearward at an initial speed of 200 FPS. A 12 pound rifle would move rearward at 141 FPS.

Ish.

 

[remington jim]

Hmmm...I know how to shoulder a rifle...butt was squarely in my shoulder which,strangely, is plenty hurtin' too but unbruised...

Just Teasing you Big Fellow ! lol RJ

 

[PEKS]

OP, even with the flesh wound, have to admit it was fun

 

[PWear 57]

I shoot a Winchester 1886 in 45-70 / 9 lb rifle and a 30-06 Springfield / 10.5 lb rifle.
45-70 - 390 gn cast bullet - 1736 fps = 30.2 ft/lbs of recoil energy
.30-06 - 210 gn ABLR - 2552 fps = 19.5 ft/lbs of recoil energy
The 45-70 kicks like crazy and it is felt.

 

[bWONGER]

Ouch!

 

[Wallenstein]

I shoot a Winchester 1886 in 45-70 / 9 lb rifle and a 30-06 Springfield / 10.5 lb rifle.
45-70 - 390 gn cast bullet - 1736 fps = 30.2 ft/lbs of recoil energy
.30-06 - 210 gn ABLR - 2552 fps = 19.5 ft/lbs of recoil energy
The 45-70 kicks like crazy and it is felt.

That is quite a difference.

I like shooting my 30.06, but after a box of ammo I am ok switching down to something lighter for the rest of the session.

Is the kick sufficiently strong to impact your choice on whether to take one or the other hunting (basis that you'd not really plan to shot more than say 2 rounds on any given target).

 

[Slimbo]

A large amount of felt recoil attributed to the 45-70 is likely a function of stock design. Lots of drop for open sights tends to exaggerate recoil, and then we compare it to a modern bolt gun with a high straight comb that handles recoil well.

 

[Wallenstein]

A large amount of felt recoil attributed to the 45-70 is likely a function of stock design. Lots of drop for open sights tends to exaggerate recoil, and then we compare it to a modern bolt gun with a high straight comb that handles recoil well.

How would you compare the straight stock on a Marlin GS vs. the more modern stock on a Marlin Dark ?

Which would be the better choice in case of the 45-70 ?

 

[hickstick_10]

My 1886 ultralight will kick fairly nasty if I drop one of my Sharps 45-70 loads in the chamber, and the Sharps will bruise after 100 rounds prone if you're just wearing a T shirt. Worse if I'm using smokeless and driving it faster.

Worst kicking gun I ever had was a little lightweight .410 single shot, with a hollow plastic stock......miserable.

 

[jonyork]

Went to the range today and shot the Marlin Dark in 45-70

Federal Hammer down 300GR at 1850 kick about on par with my 300 WM.

The Hornady 325GR at 2050 are significantly more, maybe 50% more recoil then the federal.

 

[450yukon]

Try the Marlin 16.5" TSBL off the bench with 430gr HSM bear loads.

 

[Falconflyer]

Hah!! If your calculator shows less than 20 ftlbs for a 308, it’s time for a new calculator!

Half mass times velocity squared.

Also, you mixed up the 45-70 speed.

Yes I did but the end number is the same since I miss typed the velocity.
And I rechecked the 308 data and came up with the same number (19.04) but I can make it over 20 ft lbs for you if you insist, just calculate using a lighter gun! FYI, in order to compare apples to apples I used 8 lbs for each calculation.

 

[fingers284]

I agree with you entirely. Some people don't realize that velocity is also a factor in how that energy is felt. For example, given two identical rifles, equal muzzle energy but one shooting a lighter bullet at higher velocity, the rifle with the faster velocity will push back faster at the shooter, making the recoil feel a little snappier even though the same amount of energy is transferred . I think that may be where Smcx is confused.

Jim

Actually they are both right in their own sense. Boo is correct if you shoot the same ammo thru the same WEIGHT rifle altho different configurations....And SMCX is right if you use the same ammo thru a 6 lb rifle and then a 12 lb rifle...the measurable ft lb's of"felt recoil" by SMCX will be much different from one rifle to the next but Boo's rifles will have a similar recoil measured in ft lb's.

 

[boxhitch]

How would you compare the straight stock on a Marlin GS vs. the more modern stock on a Marlin Dark ?

Which would be the better choice in case of the 45-70 ?

Are they differnt? what is the drop to comb on each?
have yet to handle a dark, but being 'modern' they may have more drop for use with optics?

 

[shakeyjake]

My 338wm (250gr) feels worse than my 458wm (500gr Hornady). The 458 is a BSA with a brake factory cut into the barrel. Shot the 338 a few weeks ago and the 250gr seemed nastier on the shoulder than the 225gr. 338s an older Browning A-Bolt. Interesting.

 

[a j cave]

Never minded the recoil. Have had many. I’m down to a Ruger #3 amd a Browning 78. My load for the Ruger is 405 gc cast over 50 gr of 3031.

 

[Why not?]

My 338wm (250gr) feels worse than my 458wm (500gr Hornady). The 458 is a BSA with a brake factory cut into the barrel. Shot the 338 a few weeks ago and the 250gr seemed nastier on the shoulder than the 225gr. 338s an older Browning A-Bolt. Interesting.

Not too surprising. The gill brakes on the old BSA are particularly effective. One in 458 Win felt more like a light weight 308 when fired, and the 30-06 was a real pussycat.

Ted

 

[Northern Amateur]

Ouch! Different rifles fit and feel different. Personally speaking: Winchester 1886, 45-70 = hurt. Marlin 1895 SS, 45-70 = no problem. Marlin 1895 GS, 45-70 = no problem. Browning BLR, 450 Marlin = hurt. But that's just me. I shoot both factory and heavy/hot reloads. Needless to say the Winchester and Browning are gone!

cheers,