What is the advantage of big bore caliber 45-70

[black powder]

a big bore rifle with a heavy bullet great for hunting VERY dangerous game ..

 

[chrismc]

Some very interesting reading and good comments by all!

Hehehe! Just did some digging and cyphering, and further to my earlier comment on the knockdown power of a shotgun slug (12 guage) - in rifleman's talk, it is a 437 gr slug (1oz) or 546 gr slug (1 1/4oz), is .738 caliber, and anywhere from 1400 - 1650 fps!!!

WoooWeee!!!!!!! Too bad the range is very limited...

 

[Boomer]

The variable Boomer is missing is the explosive force created from higher velocity rounds and rapidly expanding bullets. A rapidly expanding bullet will have a much larger wound diameter than the frontal area of the bullet in the "primary" (first portion) wound channel. Once the bullet stops "exploding" then all that Boomer suggests about wound diameters comes true.


To put it in real terms.

My 270 creates a much larger primary wound diameter then my 45-70. However after a few inches (about 6) my 45-70 creates a much larger secondary wound diameter than the 270. The lighter the game (like deer) the more apparent this is.

So, if you want to shoot a deer in the ribs, the 270 will make a bigger wound in the vitals.

If you want to shoot a moose in the shoulder the 270's explosive primary wound diameter will be "used up" in the shoulder and by the time it gets to the vitals you will be relying on frontal area to do the work. In this case the 45-70 with it's large frontal area will make a bigger wound in the vitals.




FWIW the reason a gopher "explodes" when shot with your 22-50 is because the wound diameter is larger than the animal.

The explosive force you are referring to is created by the shock-wave that comes of the rapidly expanding bullet, which I have covered. However if we are to compare apples to apples, lets compare the .270 with a 130 gr TSX bullet and a .460 Weatherby with a 350 gr TSX. Now we have two rounds with similar bullet construction and similar velocity, yet the wound volume is much greater with the .460. If we again choose the same bullet, a .458/350 TSX, but slow it down to 2500 as would be the case if it were fired from a Lott, there would be almost no difference between it and the Weatherby. Thus velocity matters but not as much as most think.

A few years back I did a bullet test as I prepared for a trip to Africa. The bullets I choose were .375s; the 300 gr X, the .270 gr XLC, and the 380 gr Rhino and were loaded to full power in my 20" .375 Ultra. The velocity of the X bullets were 2850 for the 270 gr, and 2600 fro the 300 gr. The only difference between the two recovered bullets were the length of the shank, both expanded to .72" penetration was 32" for both and the wound volumes were identical, despite a 250 fps advantage for the 270 gr bullet. Then I tried the 380 gr Rhino, which from my .375 Ultra got 2300 fps. This bullet also penetrated to 32", but the frontal expanded diameter was .92" and the wound volume was at least 3X that of either of the X bullets, despite being 550 fps slower at impact. The target range was 20'.

 

[Republic of Alberta]

Boomer you are now talking X bullets which do not display the same type of explosive force as I am referring to.


Explosive force can be divided in to 2 different categories. #1 the force created when a bullet is blown open. #2 is the force created when a bullet is blown "up" or apart.


Speaking of primary wound diameters only here...

X bullets and bonded bullets which loose no weight are in the #1 category. The increase in wound diameter from a bullet being blown open is not as exaggerated as the increase in wound diameter as the bullet being blown "apart". Also the relation between velocity and wound diameter is not as great with bullets in the #1 category as category #2


When a bullet blows "apart" the explosive force is much greater. Think of the "wap" you get when you blow a bullet up on a rock. What you are seeing and hearing is the explosive force I am talking about. The same thing happens in side an animals chest when a bullet blows apart. The front half of your partition vaporizing sends it's own shock wave AND particles flying in an outwards direction. The resulting wound can be huge. That's all I am tying to say.


Oh and i think the reason the 270 and 300g X had the same wound diameter is because the amount of bullet blown open was identical. The 250fps difference in velocity was not enough to amount to anything in this scenario. The Rhino bullet on the other hand blew much more bullet open. That is why even with less velocity the primary wound was probably bigger, obviously the secondary wound diameter would be lager due to the bigger frontal area.

 

[M1shooter]

Quigley Down Under. He seemed to be doing fine at a good distance with his. I have also seen some pretty long range shots on youtube, even with the rainbow trajectory. Also good for short range, dangerous game. Good knockdown power.

 

[Crash2k]

I'm hunting deer and moose most of the time inside 100 yards.

I know most of the caliber will do the job anyway, my .243win did the jobs also . The question was what advantage the 45-70 will provide and I thing I got nice answers

Thanks

starpuss,
I would add to your question "at what range"..
But since he didn't answer your question he must be shooting paper...

 

[Boomer]

Boomer you are now talking X bullets which do not display the same type of explosive force as I am referring to.


Explosive force can be divided in to 2 different categories. #1 the force created when a bullet is blown open. #2 is the force created when a bullet is blown "up" or apart.


Speaking of primary wound diameters only here...

X bullets and bonded bullets which loose no weight are in the #1 category. The increase in wound diameter from a bullet being blown open is not as exaggerated as the increase in wound diameter as the bullet being blown "apart". Also the relation between velocity and wound diameter is not as great with bullets in the #1 category as category #2


When a bullet blows "apart" the explosive force is much greater. Think of the "wap" you get when you blow a bullet up on a rock. What you are seeing and hearing is the explosive force I am talking about. The same thing happens in side an animals chest when a bullet blows apart. The front half of your partition vaporizing sends it's own shock wave AND particles flying in an outwards direction. The resulting wound can be huge. That's all I am tying to say.


Oh and i think the reason the 270 and 300g X had the same wound diameter is because the amount of bullet blown open was identical. The 250fps difference in velocity was not enough to amount to anything in this scenario. The Rhino bullet on the other hand blew much more bullet open. That is why even with less velocity the primary wound was probably bigger, obviously the secondary wound diameter would be lager due to the bigger frontal area.

Although you didn't name them, I expect the bullets you are referring to are Partitions, A-Square's Lion Bullet, and perhaps the match bullets that Berger is pushing off as game bullets. The Partitions have developed a good reputation over 60 odd years. The Lion bullet has produced some truly phenomenal failures, just what one wants when facing 500 pounds of the world's most successful predator. As for the Bergers, time will tell. Some folks like the idea of 30% of a bullet's mass vaporizing shortly after impact to maximize the wound volume, and this it certainly will on a broadside animal, however, when a bullet's mass is reduced by such a large percentage, momentum too is reduced, as there is no longer enough mass to support it. Lots of hunters with more experience than I will say this doesn't matter because: A) the wound in the heart/lung area is maximized and B) because the bullet often exits on a broadside shot, thus greater penetration is of no advantage.

My opinion differs somewhat and points once more to why the .45/70 is a great hunting cartridge. Not all shots are taken broadside. Some shots are taken head on, and these as a rule when placed under the chin need deep penetration if they are going to work. Some shots are taken from front quartering, which runs the risk of having the bullet using up much of it's wounding potential on a shoulder bone rather than in the soft tissue it needs to perform in an optimal manner. Rear quartering again requires a great deal of penetration, particularly if the angle is off slightly and the bullet hits the paunch which can be full of dense food matter. Shots taken from directly behind offend some, but I believe they are more common than many admit. What other shot is there when a wounded animal attempts to make cover or when bush hunting whitetails when a white flag is the only target offered? Add to this that some shots are angled from above or below the centerline of the animal, and we see that there are all sorts of ways for fragile bullets to fail. A heavy lead slug fired from a .45/70 is not fragile. Due to it's modest velocity it might not produce the huge wound volumes of its faster brothers driving jacketed bullets weighing better than an ounce at 2500 fps, but the .45/70's bullet gets to where it needs to, then keeps going.

I don't think it makes a hoot of difference which cartridge is chosen to hunt big game; all of them are capable of killing game. The choice of one cartridge over another may dictate how you can conduct a hunt, but the correct bullet choice is critical to the success of the hunt.

 

[jeff270]

The real advantage of the 45/70 is all the kool aid you get to drink.

 

[Rod B]

During the US Indian wars the US Army were having a problem with Indians using the horse they were riding as a shield. The army's answer to this was a heavier bullet that would penetrate the horse & kill the indian on the other side.

The Lyman bullet mould # 457125 is supposedly very close to the bullet that the army used.

 

[Johnn Peterson]

During the US Indian wars the US Army were having a problem with Indians using the horse they were riding as a shield. The army's answer to this was a heavier bullet that would penetrate the horse & kill the indian on the other side.

The Lyman bullet mould # 457125 is supposedly very close to the bullet that the army used.

Cool aid at its finest.

 

[unstableryan]

When I was looking for rifles, I wanted one smaller, flat shooting deer rifle and one that smashed #### for short range, camp gun kind of stuff. I chose 45-70 and 6.5x55 and I'm happy as a pig in ####. a 300 win mag will kill as good or better than a 45-70, the 45-70's just more fun.

 

[Johnn Peterson]

When I was looking for rifles, I wanted one smaller, flat shooting deer rifle and one that smashed s**t for short range, camp gun kind of stuff. I chose 45-70 and 6.5x55 and I'm happy as a pig in s**t. a 300 win mag will kill as good or better than a 45-70, the 45-70's just more fun.

True enough. Some of the reasons I picked up a Marlin 1895GS in 45-70;

• - Weather resistance here on the 'wet coast'.
• - Length, as it fits just nicely on the handle bar gun rack of my quad.
• - A comfortable amount of power, if required, in those suprise situations when cruising the boonies on the quad.

 

[Boomer]

The '95 Marlin grabbed my attention when I first saw them in '73 or '74, I think it was reintroduced in 1972 after a hiatus of nearly 60 years. I didn't know much in those days, but Elmer's lessons were that bigger was better and that bullet performance on game became suspect at any velocity in excess of 2700 fps. The Alaskan guide rifles usually made from M-71 Winchesters in .348 Winchester and .450 Alaskan grabbed my imagination, and so did the '95 Marlin like the .444 never could. I had one in the late '70s by which time though my preference for bolt guns was pretty well set.

The Marlin was a pleasure to carry, but I found reasons to criticize it. As long as I loaded 405 gr Remingtons or 400 gr Speers I had no problems, but the heavy cast bullets I really wanted to use, that shot well in a pal's #3 Ruger had too long a nose to cycle through the short Marlin action, and when I did try them single loaded ahead of stiff loads of 3031, they produced uninspiring accuracy as the soft bullets quickly fouled the micro-groove rifling of the earlier '95s. IIRC they might have been 530 gr bullets. Veral Smith of Lead Bullet Technologies wrote that he considers micro groove the best form of rifling for cast bullets, but you wouldn't know it by that '95. In those days I didn't need the big power available from a .45 caliber rifle, although I would have argued the point, yet I was dissatisfied with the .45/70 which was clearly outclassed by a .458 bolt gun in any reasonable comparison. In the end, it wasn't long before I traded the Marlin off on a 700 Remington in .30/06, with which I did some of the best practical shooting of my life, so I guess the trade was worth while.

Pounder has a '95, all gussied up with a big loop lever, long octagon barrel, full length magazine, and a pic rail with a reflex sight. Whenever I get the urge to revisit the big Marlin, I only have to look at that to be dissuaded. I tease him that any straight wall cartridge with a case shorter than 3" is a pistol cartridge.

 

[bluemike807]

An older friend of mine has been hunting with what he calls his 'hog leg' - a Ruger No1 in .45-70 that he made the furniture for - its freaking tiny, LOP is ridiculously small, and he's a tall guy - his words "it makes no sense and breaks all the rules - but it works". Honestly I think the thing is just within legal limits for length.

BUT - it works. Especially in the dense NS bush here. He has not once had to track a deer, taking proper shot placement into account. He uses his own cast bullets - not sure how many grains but theyre hefty - and his whitetails are always DRT. Often he says they are taken clean off their feet.

Im hoping to get a .45-70 myself, nothing beats it within 100yds.

 

[Muskrat]

I'm a relative newbie but from what I understand, particularly from shooting black powder pistols "from the one hand" and modern cartage ones "in the other," experience seems to show that it's a matter of energy transference.

Similarly, as far as hitting and stopping power, it would be good to have a look at the arguments for black powder (slower velocities) and lead cast (in various calibers, not to mention .45-70).

As a bit of an abstract for the .45-70 versus .308, and Not to offend anyone's range etiquette but for example, at the end of a particular day, we set up a stripped out car door shell on the range and shot at it with one round each out of a .44 mag, .357, .38 special, .45 auto and 9 mm. Then one round out of a Re-production Colt Walker 'Cap and Ball' - .44 round ball -with just 30 grains of triple F black powder.

The lead cast Round ball went through both sides of the door just like all the rest but the dimple around the entry hole in the metal of the outer shell was more than three times the size and more than twice as deep. The exit out the back of the inner shell was a hole more than twice the size of any of the others and the spall and pealing/curling of the metal was much, much more dramatic. It also left a bigger crater in the dirt backstop.

Looked pretty obvious that the damage done was far more substantial that those just passing through.

I Think this would apply to the .45-70 over the .308, also.

 

[X-fan]

Pounder has a '95, all gussied up with a big loop lever, long octagon barrel, full length magazine, and a pic rail with a reflex sight. Whenever I get the urge to revisit the big Marlin, I only have to look at that to be dissuaded. I tease him that any straight wall cartridge with a case shorter than 3" is a pistol cartridge.

Priceless right there!

 

[Johnn Peterson]

Boomer, you made mention of the 'Man'. Deviating a little from the topic at hand but I had the pleasure of spending a day at his home in Salmon Idaho. An experienced and interesting gentleman to say the least and the visit stands out as a highlight in my years of shooting and hunting.

You've also made mention of one of my favorite lever guns, the Winchester model 71 in 348 WCF. I have to agree with Elmers take on bullet weights that would improve the performance of the caliber for use on some of the bigger 'stuff' one might encounter, especially up in your locale. The readily available Hornady 200gr FP are adequate performers in most instances and recently I lucked out and acquired two boxes of old Winchester 200gr Silvertips (EXP.). However, in the land of bigger stuff, I think it would be more appropraite to go with one of the two Barnes products I've picked up, the 220gr and/or the 250gr Barnes originals.

With the Marlin 444S, I've found the performance of the caliber improved considerably over the originally available Remington 240gr factory ammo, using reloads with the Hornady 265gr FP say, on Moose for example.

And I agree, if the Marlin 1895 has a down side, it's the size of the ejection port which restricts or limits the C.O.A.L. The only option with some of the heavier and longer cast bullets around is to seat deeper. I have a few cast bullets in the 325gr - 405gr that can be seated to and crimped at the designed depth and can cycle through the action. Two jacketed I prefer in the '95 are the 400gr Speer and 405gr Remington. The bigger cast bullets from 405gr up to some 535gr I have, I keep aside for a 'goodie' I have the unlimited loan of and one I'm working on the purchase of. A Pedersoli Sharps.

 

[Boomer]

John, as always your bring a wealth experience to these threads, and some fine rifles, thankyou.

 

[Johnn Peterson]

John, as always your bring a wealth experience to these threads, and some fine rifles, thankyou.

Thanks Boomer. In line with your comment of the 45-70 being somewhat outclassed by a .458 bolt gun, you're quite correct. It's highly unlikely I'll get to hunt something where I'd need the power of a 458 WM, and while it would be hard for me to justify one, I had two. A Brno and a Winchester model 70. I elected to keep the model 70 Super Express and traded off the Brno. The Winchester just seemed to be finished off better and for a big 'thumper' I was more than pleased with the accuracy I got from it.

hs4570 was at the range with me that day and signed the target. Other than paper, the only other thing I've used it on is a steel gong we 'had' hung up at our 200yrd range. Guys had been pounding the gong with a variety of rifle calibers and finally I thought enough, and hit it with a 500gr Hornady. Gong and the chains it was hung by ended up about 20 feet out in the weeds.

 

[X-fan]

Thanks Boomer. In line with your comment of the 45-70 being somewhat outclassed by a .458 bolt gun, you're quite correct. It's highly unlikely I'll get to hunt something where I'd need the power of a 458 WM, and while it would be hard for me to justify one, I had two. A Brno and a Winchester model 70. I elected to keep the model 70 Super Express and traded off the Brno. The Winchester just seemed to be finished off better and for a big 'thumper' I was more than pleased with the accuracy I got from it.

hs4570 was at the range with me that day and signed the target. Other than paper, the only other thing I've used it on is a steel gong we 'had' hung up at our 200yrd range. Guys had been pounding the gong with a variety of rifle calibers and finally I thought enough, and hit it with a 500gr Hornady. Gong and the chains it was hung by ended up about 20 feet out in the weeds.

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me!

Love it John!