IF a new Grizzly hunt, what gun
- Thread starter Spruster
- Start date
Is it that you don't believe him that the fast 7mm and 300's are good Grizzly guns? Or that the 45-70 sucks? Or the 7x57 with 175gr bullets? He doesn't specify but American factory 7x57 with 175 grainers is slower than the 30-30 with 170 grainers by 100-200 fps, seriously, some of it isn't breaking 2000fps.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
That’s a good question.
Quite simply, because I feel utterly zero compulsion to be anything in your eyes, or that anything positive will come from sharing with you. Thanks for this spring circus of a good bear thread, I owe you that, and nothing else. If you don’t like what I have to tell you, carry on and keep making a good racket around the forum.
Yep, they already owned all my neighbours, and the gov’t then shut down the hunt. I had one final offer, when your house is mortgaged with your kids in it to have the territory, you too can decide for yourself when you take that risk. I left happy, can still hunt there as can any resident, just not for any species the gov closed.
I am genuinely interested in the displeasure with the 45-70, to the point where you would ask the client if they would rather use a different rifle? (I'm a big 45-70 guy lol).
I got the part about "speed kills" but I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that the 45-70 is a terrible choice, and it has nothing to do with questioning your experience, quite the opposite actually.
I would guess anyone going for big bears would have that thing loaded up as hot as possible, which I could see affecting marksmanship(flinching)? I've shot a lot of game over the years with the 45-70, but only 1 bear(black), and it was absolutely devastating every single time, when I put the bullet where it belonged. I consider 45-70 a short range cartridge when hunting with it, is that one of your concerns? What is/was an average shot distance? If shots would be expected 150+ then I would voluntarily choose something different.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
On the .45-70, I’ll never tell you it won’t kill reliably on big bears or anything else. What it doesn’t do reliably, is put them down in a hurry.
Yep, it can, but shoot 10 bears with a .45-70 and 10 with a .30-06 and the modern (117 year old) rifle will win every time. The dividing factor is speed, below 2200fps impacts the shock waves travelling through tissue no longer cause permanent damage. Above that speed, damage in wounds increases dramatically. This is born out in lab testing.
I like rifles that can make 2500-3000fps at the muzzle, and they make guides’ lives easier. There’s also a misnomer in my mind that .45 is a “big” hole, when in reality it’s an 1/8” bigger than a .30 cal. Make it a fist size hole and I may concede the argument, but when even an Brenekke slug isn’t the hammer of Thor on bears at .720 the bore size / frontal area argument gets a bit weak.
At the end of the day, a .375 penetrates like a .45-70 on bears and gives the benefit of effective speed. Even so, it’s slower than the .300s with most loads and landed in third place behind the .300 and 7mm Mag.
Yep, it can, but shoot 10 bears with a .45-70 and 10 with a .30-06 and the modern (117 year old) rifle will win every time. The dividing factor is speed, below 2200fps impacts the shock waves travelling through tissue no longer cause permanent damage. Above that speed, damage in wounds increases dramatically. This is born out in lab testing.
I like rifles that can make 2500-3000fps at the muzzle, and they make guides’ lives easier. There’s also a misnomer in my mind that .45 is a “big” hole, when in reality it’s an 1/8” bigger than a .30 cal. Make it a fist size hole and I may concede the argument, but when even an Brenekke slug isn’t the hammer of Thor on bears at .720 the bore size / frontal area argument gets a bit weak.
At the end of the day, a .375 penetrates like a .45-70 on bears and gives the benefit of effective speed. Even so, it’s slower than the .300s with most loads and landed in third place behind the .300 and 7mm Mag.
I'd carry my 338 WM shooting a 205 shock hammer and want the shot inside 150yrds. Wouldn't it be nice to get that hunt back. Always wanted a nice silvertip out of the Kootenays. You would be getting excited about your draw now!
Ardent I like your post, thanks.
Ardent I like your post, thanks.
Loaded appropriately, it will take any animal on earth. Powerful, Fast handling, quick reloading, easy carrying, Whats not to like?
My decisions are based on what I have in my safe.
45-70 Marlin 1895G
My 30-06 is a TC Encore, single shot. Ya, I know, there's a guide backing a guy up, but I'm not paying for someone else to shoot my trophy.
My 458 Win mag is a Ruger No.1 see above, but Could easily be loaded 2600+ with a 350gr TSX (No desire to carry this thing days on end, lol)
My 375 Ruger is a bolt gun, likely the better choice from what I've read.
How about 1895 Winchester in .405? Given the reply on the 45-70, I would guess the 405 falls in the same class...
Last edited:
I appreciate the 45-70 for much the same reasons, but I find I rarely use mine. I don't have much of a rifle collection, but there always seems to be a better choice for what I'm doing that day. Different strokes, though.
For hunting grizzly:
Deader faster at the range you need, in the most packable and shootable package.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
That’s a bit of a misnomer, shock is a completely different neurological factor that you can’t rely on, it just shows up a lot more with faster bullets. The effect I’m talking about is what the FBI found out in the ballistics lab about tissue damage vs speed, there’s a phase shift to tissue permanent damage (unrelated to shock) at 2200fps impacts.
Others had deduced it long before, militaries and hunters, and I saw it myself in the wounds as a range factor. When the range stretched to where impacts fell below the 2200fps range the animals started death sprinting more and dying elsewhere more often. The wounds cleaned up with much less meat damage too, that bloodshot tissue is the permanent damage from the waves of a 2200+ fps impact. With grizzlies and mountain goats dying elsewhere’s a problem in guiding in our terrain.
I asked clients to bring their elk rifle if they had one. Typically, that was a .300, I preferred a .375 to follow up bears as I wanted the penetration. Now on .45-70 guns, I love slick lever guns. There are .45-70 loads that do better, the faster ones, but their range is incredibly short due to the stubby bullets and barn door BCs. I also will never tell a guy he’s doing it wrong hunting his bears with one, never seen a bear not die shot with a heavy bullet, slower round or fast one that had slowed due to range. I just definitely seen them travel much further after the hit.
I appreciate the reply.
I understand what you're saying, and I understand the need for an animal to be DRT as compared to a tracking job, or falling down the side of a mountain. I have never had the pleasure of hunting an animal or area where that has been a concern, hopefully one day.
On a side note, I've always considered the lack of jellied and bloodshot meat one of the 45-70 qualities, but then again I haven't hunted animals that would like to eat me either, and no cliffs to jump off here.
Plus, a 50 yard death dash has never really been a concern on the wide open prairie, ideally its in the same direction as the truck....
Last edited:
