Hunting Grizzly with the 45-70

GMC403 said:
I was always under the impression that an Engineers job IS to make yer noggin' hurt more........

Well...... at least in my world (Structural & Mechanical engineers).
Click to expand...

Don't even get me started! Currently finishing up a swing bridge refurb. Talk about making a simple job in to a cluster*#&% by adding 5 engineers.

No offence to those who actually know what they are doing and what not to get involved with!

As for the 45-70, been a great read and thread. I am planning to take out my Miroku 86 and load up some hunting loads with lyman's 457643 flat point. I will be limiting all shots to 100 yards max, preferably 50 to maintain energy. No big bears around here but for close up shooting I would feel for for table with a full mag tube of 400 gainers. Practised shouldering and cycling and I can crank them off pretty quick.

The much maligned buckhorn sights are great for quick shots at close range.
 
aric84 said:
Don't even get me started! Currently finishing up a swing bridge refurb. Talk about making a simple job in to a cluster*#&% by adding 5 engineers...
Click to expand...

:p

33355122592_ccbd5212e7.jpg


32697199713_454dcdcca6.jpg
 
aric84 said:
Don't even get me started! Currently finishing up a swing bridge refurb. Talk about making a simple job in to a cluster*#&% by adding 5 engineers.

No offence to those who actually know what they are doing and what not to get involved with!

As for the 45-70, been a great read and thread. I am planning to take out my Miroku 86 and load up some hunting loads with lyman's 457643 flat point. I will be limiting all shots to 100 yards max, preferably 50 to maintain energy. No big bears around here but for close up shooting I would feel for for table with a full mag tube of 400 gainers. Practised shouldering and cycling and I can crank them off pretty quick.

The much maligned buckhorn sights are great for quick shots at close range.
Click to expand...

Too old for the buckhorns, but I really like the Firesights I put on it. Line up the 3 blurry dots and boom. I can't understand why they don't polish those sights to take the blur off them, but what the hey.
 
Papaclaude said:
Too old for the buckhorns, but I really like the Firesights I put on it. Line up the 3 blurry dots and boom. I can't understand why they don't polish those sights to take the blur off them, but what the hey.
Click to expand...
HHAA!!! I practise with blurry sights lined up with a blurry target . Then aim for the centre of the blurr..
 
medvedqc said:
the ground is wet so the print is bigger than in reality lol ....
Click to expand...



Check out the paw prints from my 90 pound German shepherd, near the rock beside the bear track, the ones that look like fox tracks; my tracks aren't in the photo, but they didn't leave much more of an impression than my dog's and I weigh 225. We stumbled into him in the willows a few minutes before we photoed his track, and I believe he'd have gone 850 pounds.

Something to consider is that polar bears have a large foot print to give them better floatation in the snow. Some of our bears are twice the weight of this bear, and half again bigger, then again its not the big mature bears that usually concern me from a safety point of view, its the subadult males that can be bad news.

When this guy got darted and weighed, he came in at a little under 1700 pounds . . .
 
Last edited:
Boomer said:


Check out the paw prints from my 90 pound German shepherd, near the rock beside the bear track, the ones that look like fox tracks; my tracks aren't in the photo, but they didn't leave much more of an impression than my dog's and I weigh 225. We stumbled into him in the willows a few minutes before we photoed his track, and I believe he'd have gone 850 pounds.

Something to consider is that polar bears have a large foot print to give them better floatation in the snow. Some of our bears are twice the weight of this bear, and half again bigger, then again its not the big mature bears that usually concern me from a safety point of view, its the subadult males that can be bad news.

When this guy got darted and weighed, he came in at a little under 1700 pounds . . .
Click to expand...

Brings to mind a quote by Elmer Keith, "being over gunned beats the alternative" :) .
 
As Boomer said when it really counts a chest shot is not considered the shot to take. Spine , brain if head on , front shoulders from the side. We tell our bear guards the best case scenario in a worst case situation is the bear comes for the bear guard not the client .
pounder
 
Boomer said:


Check out the paw prints from my 90 pound German shepherd, near the rock beside the bear track, the ones that look like fox tracks; my tracks aren't in the photo, but they didn't leave much more of an impression than my dog's and I weigh 225. We stumbled into him in the willows a few minutes before we photoed his track, and I believe he'd have gone 850 pounds.

Something to consider is that polar bears have a large foot print to give them better floatation in the snow. Some of our bears are twice the weight of this bear, and half again bigger, then again its not the big mature bears that usually concern me from a safety point of view, its the subadult males that can be bad news.

When this guy got darted and weighed, he came in at a little under 1700 pounds . . .
Click to expand...

i really checked the paws at first ... i was just making fun ... but thank to give that unique feedback on polar bears.

Phil
 
It seems that this has moved into a defence thread not hunting sorry. I am the first to admit that I do not hunt Polar bears and I only carry my 45-70 for defence. However within it's range I would not feel undergunned hunting with a 45-70.
pounder
 
Funny how that always seems to happen. My overall understanding of it in a hunting situation it to keep the 45-70 limited to it's best range, just as a bow hunter would to make sure the shot hits home and makes a clean kill.

Is it the best calibre? Like a bow, no, but it gives a challenge that some seek and will do the job in competent hands controlled by a cool head. For longer ranges a .338 WM or the like is probably a better choice as discussed.
 
Ashcroft said:
Many years ago I took one small-medium grizzly with my Winchester 1886 and a Speer 400 gr flat point at 1600 Fps, range est 125 yards. Bear was standing on hind legs looking at me, more curious than aggresive, a centre chest hit did not exit. The bear dropped, turned and ran, probably went 200+ yards, fortunately not towards me. One shot kill, yes, fight stopper, no. Took moose with the same load, usually one shot, always under 175 yards, also two with 486gr hard cast lead bullet, these have great penetration, very little expansion, in effect a solid. The Hornady 350 gr round nose bullets I tried were designed for the 458 Win mag, jackets too heavy for most sane 45-70 velocities although I shot one moose and one black bear with these bullets in a .458x2" at about 2050 fps with great one shot kills. Also worked great in a long throated Ruger #1 45/70 at a chronographed 2400 fps. Speer makes (or did) a good 350 gr semi spitzer flat point with a medium jacket and Nosler has their ever reliable Partition. Bullets are made differently for for the 45/70 than the ones for the .458 mag and they are not interchangeable for reliable use on game, especially potentially dangerous game. The same goes for hard or soft cast bullets. Match your bullet to your game and your velocity. Good luck. J.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I guide these hunts and .45-70 is close to my last choice. Ted / Why Not guided for decades and feels the same about the .45-70, they kill reliably, not quickly.

Bears are highly susceptible to shock, and for shock you want impacts of 2400-2500fps and up when the bullet meets the animal. This spells .30-06 and .300 pretty nicely. At 200gr I'm less a fan of the .30-06 and even .300 Win beyond 150ish yards. Even a .270 150gr is superior on Grizzlies to a .45-70, especially if that .45-70 is loaded with cast. Not a popular opinion on the internet where the .45-70 is held in high regard as some sort of "hammer", which it really isn't in my opinion. It's a moderate heavy and slow cartridge that kills things moderately and slowly. It will reliably kill a grizzly, it's just far less likely to cause that grizzly to fall on its own shadow.

ALL these cartridges will kill grizzly bears, but if you want the ideal it's a .300-375 Mag loaded with a mid range bullet weight of good construction. People treat and load for Grizzlies like they're buffalo and that's a mistake.

 
Slamfire said:
At blackpowder load levels. A 45-70 Ruger No.1 loaded to its full potential is an entirely different beast.
Click to expand...

Lower levels for sure......

Angus is right.....

I have tried to like the .45-70 for many reasons.... I just can't get it done.....

It lacks punch, has the trajectory of a falling safe and is certainly not a "bang flop" cartridge..... although like most, it will do its job in its range if used responsibly.....

That being said, when I see "guide guns" chambered in it, and hear of folks thinking they have one and that it's the ultimate "bear defence" round, I cringe......

There is a big difference between "eat right up to the hole", and "put it down quick"....
 
Very true, if it does less meat damage, it delivers less shock. I don't profess varmint bullets and there's an appropriate middle ground to be found in well motivated Partitions, A-Frames, TSXs (less meat damage but I like no lead), GMXs (same), Accubonds, Hotcors, TBBCs (stiff like a TSX), CEBs, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom