Having read the posts re: the use of 45-70's on dangerous game (I wasn't around to participate)...I couldn't help but wonder how much of the disdain for the 45-70 is based upon its primary use in leveractions (which no one has mentioned). We all know it can be loaded to nearly 458 win mag levels...yet the original bp loads accounted for probably more bison than all the elephant kills of all time. I'm not advocating that load in the 45-70...just something to think about.

I've participated in penetration tests of the 45-70 side by side with .500 doubles & even the .500 A-Square with premium bullets in all flavors...I wouldn't mind hearing more points of view than someone saying,"It's not possible...it can't be true...I don't believe the penetration tests and the photos...they must be marketing hype or lies." You that are saying these things have more experience and logic than this. The next thing I know, you'll be saying that .45 Colt brass is weak...nay, dangerous!

I haven't been on this site much but I know we can play nice here. Gentleman, your thoughts?

I know where you're coming from, I have the same feeling about those that say the 480 ruger is pointless.

Personally, I don't believe there is an argument about the penetration. What I do believe is that velocity does play a factor in terminal performance, and that while the 45-70 can be made to drill deep by using heavy hardcast bullets, it doesn't do the same damage as an "African" round does.

For isntance, I'd much rather have a 416 pushing a 350 gr bullet 2500 fps for use against big bears, then any load in a 45-70. With the 416, I have enough weigth to fully penetrate, and enough speed to rip a large wound channel. With a 45-70, if I use 350's at 2200 fps, I don't have the penetration of the 416, and if I go heavier to get the penetration, I loose the diameter of the wound channel.

Really, internal balistics are always a matter of comprimise. It is the bullet that does the work, not the case. When you look at what type of work you want done, you settle on a certain bullet weight and caliber, and muzzle velocity, then you hunt for a cartridge that'll do it.

Simply put, with ~50 years of field trials, if you choose a 45 rifle for hunting dangerous game, the most consistant combination is a 500 gr bullet at 2300-2400 muzzle velocity. Thats just the way it is, and a 45-70 won't do that, neither will a 458 win mag.

The conditions the bison were hunted under, compared to what a sportsman faces in Africa is worlds apart. A cape buff at 20 yards in thick scrub is not a bison 100's of yards off in a prairie, or a stack of wet newspapers in a test stand! Maybe after 10-20 years of signifigant field tests, we'll find out that the garrett hammerhead load surpasses a 416 or "class II" 45 magazene rifle, but I wouldn't count on it.

ok... lets think!!

I shoot and hunt with a 375, 404 jeff, 450 3 1/4, 450 ack, and a 500 N.E. 3". They all have 2 things in common with my 45-70. They all penetrate large animals better, and they all seeming kill large game better.

A couple of thoughts here...

For Paul: "...if I go heavier to get the penetration, I loose the diameter of the wound channel." Unless you're referring to the effect of tissue displacement, I'm not sure what you mean. Of course, very little has been mentioned about bullet construction which is a key issue.

For example, the 500 Nitro 3 1/4" 570 gr. soft penetrated 25" in the test I was at recently. However, the 570 gr. fmj went 48"...both were Woodleighs. Bullet type made more of a difference than bullet make.

The 500 A Square 670 gr. fmj went 55"...so did the 45-70 530 gr. LBT. The difference between these 2 was that the A Square tumbled and bounced off the bottom of the board (others tumbled out the side of the media). The 45-70 LBT tracked straight. The A Square was also doing 1,000 more fps.

Despite what Smallfry claims, the 45-70 (loaded properly) is at least the equal of the .375 if not much more (within 100 yds). When do you say good enough? Show me some data...have you done the tests? All these guns will do the job if the man behind the gun does his (testing for penetration, accuracy, control, etc).

These posts keep coming up all over. Here is my take.

Will the 45-70 do the job. Yeah. Would it be my first choice...Hell no. I would probably rather use a .308 and Brain them. To me its not much different. Its all trick shooting. Sure it can be done....Inuits shoot Polar bears with .222, Native alaskans still use tons of old 30-30 to kill grizzlies. The list goes on. In my opinion it just isnt a wise choice. (Yes I have shot a buff, and I used a 416rem mag)

the real problem is you arent going to convince one side or the other. Its a dead horse that people just keep beating. Some think its the best thing since sliced bread, others wouldnt piss on it if it was set aflame. I'm not in eeither camp...its not my business what you desire to use on Buff, or Deer or mice even. Just dont shove it down my throat. Cause no matter what claims are made...if it was the killer some says it is...then hell every PH in Africa would carry one. Big meplat...shmeplat.

tha argument had merit 20 posts ago...just not now.

Djinn

I thought I would let this lie some time ago but just for the sake of keeping it straight (since I am partly responsible for fanning this fire when it was just getting started), let me state that, having followed this argument since its inception, I don't recall EVER seeing a post that made the 45-70 a BETTER killer than any nitro express or similar weapon, or even made it out to be equivalent. The argument was that it wasn't so far behind as to be patently absurd.

Extremism of viewpoint, however, seems to be an all too common reaction on this site. If it isn't the be-all and end-all then its nothing-at-all. I am also mystified by the numbers of people who feel compelled to throw in their opinion (not facts), while claiming not to care one way or the other. What's the point? I do care about facts and I could care less about anyone's notion of things, less still for their indifference.

Numerous people have killed buffalo with a 45-70. Phil Spangenberger has done it more than once using trapdoor loads and softpoints! He didn't shoot them in the brain, either. The efficacy of the combination is beyond dispute. Are there MORE effective cartridges? Obviously, but comparisons to .22s and "trick shooting" only reveal a lack of knowledge of what has been done.

Stopping a charge is iffy with ANY weapon, even an 8 bore. Buffalo just don't respond to pain or trauma when in that mood and they aren't going to bleed to death in 2 seconds. Whether anyone can show that using such and such a weapon will provide a greater margin of success in stopping a charge is highly debatable in my view and I will be very hard to persuade based on what I have seen with my own eyes. Intuitively it makes sense but here again the advantage may be too slight to be of much benefit and I have seen a buffalo hit right in the head with a 500 Nitro that didn't do anything more than knock some dust off. The buffalo never even registered the impact.

But IF there is a more effective weapon (say a 700 Nitro or a 4 bore), then (using the argument tendered here by too many to enumerate) anyone using anything less is a rank fool. Why limit yourself to a puny 500 Jeffery when there is a 600 Jeffery, etc.? Obviously unsportsmanlike conduct. I hope I don't need to point out the absurdity here, and yet this is the line of reasoning that has been leveled from the start.

Reasoned experts recommend using as much gun as you can handle, but that still leaves the reality that some people will be armed with 9.3 mm and 375 calibers, neither of which will cause more damage nor penetrate deeper than a 45-70 properly loaded. Judgments against common sense then would seem unfair, unless you damn anyone using less than a 458 (or a 416) across the board.

Yukon Delta,

I am interested in your tests. If they were into saturated newsprint or phonebooks I would like to add them to my database with your permission. And for those who ridicule testing into (pick your flavor) the bottom line is this: if that 45-70 bullet penetrates deeper into the medium than a 375 bullet, then it will do the same thing proportionately on a game animal. You have to apply a scaling factor and you need a medium that is as hard as the target in order to fully test the bullet's construction (and no, wet paper isn't buffalo bones by a long shot - that has to be tested differently).

[This message has been edited by Harald (edited 07-24-2001).]

Harald

Obviously your post was directed my way. Which is fine. I really couldnt care less that you dont care for my indifference to the 45-70. But Im not quite sure what you wanted me to give for facts. But lets look at my post shall we...

Fact. The 45-70 isnt my first choice.

Fact. I NEVER stated that the 45-70 wouldnt do the job.

Fact. You will NEVER convince some people that it is a suitable cartridge for the job.

Fact. NO PH'S use them to back up on Buff or any other dangerous game. That should tell you a little something.

Fact. It is ALL my opinion.

I understand you dont agree. But that Holier than thou attitude about why some poeple are compelled to give there opinion without caring either way is the lamest stuff I ever heard. You obviously didnt read my post well. I stated that I didnt care what anyone else uses on game. That doesnt mean I dont have an opinion about a question. Or i am not entitled to express it. If your not interested in my opinion..fine move on. Dont try that passive antagonism crap on me. Its downright rude.

As far as a lack of knowledge..you can call it that. I hunt buff with SUITABLE cartridges that have done the job many times over. Sorry if that doesnt qualify me to comment on these "new and improved" 45-70's. To me it is trick shooting. Its all relative..too ones own experience. Unfortunately you do not believe I deserve an opinion, or am not very smart. So be it. Just dont lump me into your little rude party and we'll be all set.

Djinn

Djinn, I did not aim my comments only at you, I had a wider audience in mind. My allusion to your (and others' before you) confessed indifference (not to the 45-70, but to the question itself) does not deny you your right to an opinion. Your're welcome to it. But when you yourself make the judgment that "[that] argument had merit 20 posts ago...just not now", I have to wonder why you bothered to spout your highly inflammatory and judgmental remarks at all. Nobody has been shoving anything down your throat. Until today I never even heard of you.

The facts I speak of are those relating to measured performance, whether on game, or in tests, or statistics compiled from actual incidents. I don't think an opinion poll merits the name of facts, even if they are "real" opinions. Facts that I am interested in can be established and have objective value apart from anyone's viewpoint or opinion. Thats what makes them meaningful.

PHs make choices on a very different basis than a sport hunter. They will only shoot in a confrontation or when an animal may be lost. That naturally biases their requirements to as much gun as they can handle. I bet not too many use a 375 H&H either as a backup to a client, but that is far and away the recommendation for clients to use.

Furthermore, there is a world of difference between braining a buffalo with a .308 or a .22 (as one suggested) and using a cartridge that will kill just as quickly as many other more conventional choices under typical (99%) circumstances. A "stunt" or "trick shot" is to use a weapon that is clearly inadequate to kill quickly when employed in the customary fashion (heart/lung hit). That does not describe the 45-70 and anyone who maintains that it does either doesn't know better (which is what I said) or knows better and is simply hard-headed (not being a mind reader, I make no judgment of that).

You accuse me of being rude, hoss, but you basically jumped into this, said it made no difference to you (which is clearly not true or at least that's your stand now), stated the obvious (thereby insulting everyone's intelligence), accused us of shoving it down your throat, and then told us to shut up because it was annoying you that this was being still discussed.

But I'm rude? Did I miss something there?

This thread was started with two basic appeals: reason founded on facts, and polite discourse. If I have violated either of those dictums then I apologize to all present. But if you imagine that anyone here is free to spout an unfounded opinion and go unchallenged you are going to be disappointed. Most of the posts here are motivated by concerns slightly more profound than the enjoyment of listening to oneself pontificate and people expect something of substance. I agree that probably many of those who have written on this particular subject have formed their views and won't easily be changed, but some of us are willing to be persuaded by facts away from our preconceived beliefs and want to learn. Thats why I'm here, at any rate. Opinions be damned.

Harald

While I enjoy your eloquence and great prose. I simply disagree. Its not what you said. Its how you said it. To me it was rude. Im not really sure how my remarks were inflammatory, or judgemental. I simply stated the truth as probably a large percentage of this board see it. Its a dead horse. If that is inflammatory or judgemental...OK. I can live with that. Its sad when someone states the obbvious and it is somehow controversial. That I can accept too.

The facts that you are looking for simply dont add up. We are talking about a very small amount of shots fired. Lifetime's of experience is behind alot more cartridges. They have been used, and abused so too speak. They have proven their worth where it counts...and not in stacks of wet newspaper.

As far as what PH's use. I simpply stated that if they were the killer that Garret, and Buffalo Bore claim. Then you would certainley see them used heavily by people who do the "sorting out" for a livelyhood. I dont really see how that is so far fetched, or what it has to do with a PH's vs. A Hunters perspective.

Using a .308 to brain a Buff isnt trick shooting to me. It is a quick and easy means for a cull hunt. And one I have witnessed before by a PH. To me that seems a much safer solution than using the 45-70 much the same manner you would a .416 rem mag.

I "jumped into this" after alot of deliberation. I have said it once and will say it again. I have absoloutley no cares what you decide to use on any game. As long its a legal cartridge (which BTW the 45-70 isnt in alot of africa...maybe that says something) I stated that. I also stated that I have no doubts that a 45-70 will work. just because you give it more respect than I do, doesnt mean Im somehow being adversarial. I also am free to give my opinion on this board as much as you. I simply dont have to justify why I do anything here. And as to why I have replied to your posts is simple, I dont deal well with condescending people. You sure can type prettier words then me, and are wonderfully eloquent, but your opinion doesnt mean more than mine. And you certainley have no business expressing how I feel...or think.

As far as being challenged on unfounded posts...I just dont get it. Your reasoning on that one has me asking quetsions. I stated opinion. And plenty of fact. I didnt recite one iota of data about penetration tests, or bullet selection, or sectiona densities.

I think I have said all I can. We disagree. I though you were rude, you thought I was. I bet neither of us meant to be though. You have your opinions, and I have mine. You have the facts you choose to present, and I have the ones choose to present. We simply disagree on this. thats all. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Will I ever be convinced that the 45-70 is a good choice. No. Is it adequate in the right hands, in the right circumstances. Of course. But I will continue to use and reccomend a .416, a 2nd level 458 or something with more authority. I will refrain form replies to 45-70 based posts though. As I think my point was made. Looking at the 7 posts so far 4 of them were ours. Good Day

Djinn

Djinn...you say the 45-70 isn't legal in much of Africa...where can I find this info?

You say that you've stated plenty of fact for your position and then, "I didnt recite one iota of data about penetration tests, or bullet selection, or sectiona densities." I am not taking your words out of context...

I'm glad you're posting here (really) but I can't understand why you say "Will I ever be convinced that the 45-70 is a good choice. No." I'm not asking you to change your mind. I don't really care what people think about my caliber choices (and I love most calibers) but I try to have an open mind regarding "new developments." You might really think I'm crazy if you saw me hunt dangerous game with my bow or my 5 shot revolvers...either of which kill as good as any of my rifles. And, like most people, I would never have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes. Isn't that a pretty good description of most of us?

Let's all keep posting no matter the subject as I feel that we can all learn from each other. As I said originally, it's best if we stick to the subject/facts and be careful about other people's opinions...we all have a right to one

Seems like the Alpha males are starting their rut early this year.

I know its dificult to accept that rounds that are ~150 years old, using cast bullets, that were replaced ~ 100 years ago with jacketed, could possibly work better then they did way back when they were discarded for better tools. I'm willing to be openminded, and will try and do some testing of big bore sixguns (480 ruger w/ 390 gr LFN) medium bore rifle (35 whelen ackley 205 gr a-frame), and big rifles with cast and jacketed (458X404 and 500 Jeffrey)

The 458X404 should be a good testbed, Saeco makes a 540 gr mold I plan to get, I can test it at 1700, 1800, 1900, 2000, 2100 and 2200 fps. I only have a 450 gr LFN mold for the 500, but plan on getting something in the 600 gr range in the future.

I think that if we are really honest with ourselves, we'll realize game can be killed with minimal levels of power, provided everything goes according to plan. It is simply our personal level of conservatism that dictates the power levels we choose to work in those situations we didn't plan.

A funny thing I've noticed is how Ross Seyfried is so enamored with his 440 gr @ 1350 fps from his 475 linebaugh, yet disdains the 458 win mag and describes its only attribute is that the brass can be formed into the 416 Taylor. I actually agree with him quite a bit, but it is dificult to communicate the reasons one draws those conclusions, and its danged hard to convince others of those reasons.

Interesting reply Paul. I look forward to hearing your results. What would happen if we wouldn't swallow everything we heard/read and did the testing ourselves? It still amazes me that people have no respect for paper tests...if you establish a reference load and compare your tests with the reference point than you have some ground to stand on. Why would someone take a load on an expensive hunt based upon someone's opinion and no tests of their own...except to say it's the most accurate. Who cares about a load that's 1/2" more accurate? Show me the man who can prove that in field conditions and I'll buy both of you lunch. Accuracy (alone) is not everything. Test your stuff guys...Test your stuff for yourself.

I have been frowned upon by some due to my mantra that "heavy for caliber bullets at moderate velocities placed properly will responsibly kill anything." When you get into "stopping caliber debates" all bets and/or logic are --off. It becomes very emotional from there.

I did not realize that the 45/70 vs. buffalo thread was initially aimed at "stopping potential." It quickly seemed to turn into voices saying that the 45-70 wasn't good enough to do anything but bounce off your average buffalo, bear, bull packrat, etc.

I really do like Seyfried's work (more than most probably)...I think his disdain with the 458 win mag is probably like his dislike of the 30-06...too common for his interests. He does say in print that the average shooter is much better off with the 416's than the 45's and larger. I would agree, albeit without the experience to back it up. Most of what Ross writes is not magical except to remind us to keep our feet on the ground (use common sense). We all lose track of that at times.

Paul, that Saeco bullet likes pretty nice. I have a mold of similar form by Lee which casts a 500 grainer that will feed in my Ruger. I really want a heavy one with a much broader meplat but LBT is defunct and I haven't run across anyone who will sell cast bullets of LBT style in those weights. A 500 to 550 gr WLN would be ideal.

I wouldn't disagree with anything you said about the old calibers and I'll add that I don't believe that they work any better today than they once did (discounting high pressure - but a 3-1/4 inch BPE case will do what a 45-70 or 50-90/Alaskan does with high pressure). There's no question in my mind that better performing weapons are available today. How much better is the question I want answered. I think your earlier argument about the damage caused by more modern cartridges is a good point, but I'd like to see that quantified and like compared with like (ie, RN solids with hardcast RNs, softpoints compared with softpoints or wide FNs).

I'll be very interested in your results. The alloy probably needs to be carefully considered. I notice that Garrett uses a silver alloy to avoid brittleness. Baker used mercury in his bullets. I think you can get satisfactory results by using heat-treated wheelweights, but I wouldn't let them get excessively hard. Linotype is probably not going to work well. I think it will shatter at the higher velocities or if a hard object is struck. Brittle bullets will also be more inclined to abrade and lose that wide meplat. I apologize if all this is obvious to you.

Speaking of hard objects, whatever you choose for a medium, some will want to know how those old cast bullets will behave when they smack bones... The trick will be coming up with something that will allow a consistent test of performance, otherwise some bullets will hit thinner bones or glance rather than hit squarely, etc. I suggest stacked ceramic tiles, but maybe you should poll for a concensus in order to satisfy the peer review.

[This message has been edited by Harald (edited 07-25-2001).]

Harald there is an easy way to simulate bones in the paper test...use bones! Get some from your butcher, grocer, etc. and insert them into your water soaked paper in appropriate places. Depending on your intended use of said bullet don't be afraid to get creative...wrap the bones/paper in leather for example. The more we substitute for the real thing the more our results are open to interpretation IMO. That being said, I would be interested to see your results using those tiles stacked up.

The most important thing to remember in paper testing is that you establish a baseline to compare all of your results too. That way it doesn't matter if your paper was wetter than mine, etc. Your paper tests will not be comparable to mine unless our baseline was similar. Only when the baseline results are similar do you have "apple to apple" comparisons.

Something that is hard for me to understand is that there is a real difference between a bullet being hard and being brittle. Brittle is never good but hardness (which is more than just BHN grading) is almost always good. The tests that I am aware of are shying away from linotype now due to its brittleness (not hardness).

Yukon.

The reason I will never be convinced as to why the 45-70 is a good choice for a buff rifle is actually alot of opinion and some personal shooting experience. The 45-70 in no way shape or form can achieve 458 win mag ballistics. In reality it cant even get close. The reason the level 2 458 are so popular is that it has been shown on many accounts that the 500 grain at 2100+/- isnt the greatest killer. Its adequate, but not awe inspiring. A cartridge that develops less velocity isnt going to make that same .458" hole somehow more lethal. (for the record, I wouldnt choose a 458 win mag for my hunt) Sure bullet design, and adding some pressure to the old girl will pick up some of the slack. Just not enough to make me comfortable. I wouldnt feel comfortable with the winnie, my "basement" round is a .416 400 grain A frame or woodleigh at about 2400fps. BTW I would say your "crazy" for hunting Buff with a revolver or a bow You obviously have a bigger set than me...

As far as parts of africa not allowing the 45-70. Some..not all have minimum Ft./lbs. requirements for dangerous game. The basement really is at the 9.3x62 level..and some mandating the 375 H&H as minimum. I couldnt tell you what countries. I simply asked my PH if my 416 rem would do...he said yes..thats what I brought. I usually bring a big hammer...so I have never been in the situation to ask which areas have minimums. And I certainley couldnt tell you what those minmums are...some are caliber if memory serves me correctly..and some are ft/lbs.

Straight up stoppers are a non existent thing. There simply is no caliber or cartridge that can be fired form the shoulder that will guarantee a stop. I dont consider my 416 a stopper. the stopper is the man who pulls the trigger on the gun. The one with a cool enough head to bear down, face the problem and cut loose on it. The only way to "stop " a buff or most any animal bent on stomping or chomping you is to dissconnect the power supply. Brains or spine. Period. A hole in the brain is a stop, the size of it really doesnt matter.

I think Paul hit it on the head when he said people have there own personal minimums. I know that I have no desire to do some controlled "field" tests and then hope that it will work in the real world. There are not always broad side shots, and no wind days. You genteleman know that. It could have gone unfortunately wrong for Mr. Spangenbereger(sp?) and there could have been nothing his PH could have done to save his hide. Thats why when I go looking for something that can stomp or chomp...I arm myself like I am alone. That is the confidence I need, and the 45-70 doesnt do that for me. I am not saying that It couldnt be done in just because I am carrying a 416 rem mag or some such beast. All I am saying is to me I have the confidence in my rifle, and my loads to finish the job, and stand toe to toe if need be. Many things can go wrong on a buff hunt, even the best have been tossed or worse.

I understand the argument to the very large meplat. I also understand the effects of Hydostatic shock. I cant quantitatively tell you which is true, but in the 45-70 you are settling on one. I would be very interested to see a FN 500 grain FMJ load at about 2300fps used in tests. I believe Alaska Bullet Works makes one. Maybe a load that could use both theories could prove a more potent tool than the sum of there parts.

Djinn

Djinn I knew we could all play nice Thanks for coming right out and saying alot of this was based upon your opinion. No one here (as far as I can tell) wants to force anyone to hunt with their rifle/caliber. It's just fun to talk about the merits of each one.

What would you say if I knew about safe loading data that puts the 45-70 very close to factory 458 win mag loads? Maybe you'd believe me...maybe not and that's ok. As you said, you're not real thrilled about the 458 anyway. The only reason I mention this is because you CAN get the 45-70 close to the 458 if you want to pay the price in recoil (and I don't). In reality, it's pushing the 45-70 a little hard when you can easily hit it with the 458. But it just goes to show you that most cartridges are capable of more than the average shooter is aware of.

It's interesting that you are confident in the ballistics of the 416 but not the 458. Goes to show you that the biggest hammer may not be the best tool for the job. I'm sure there are 458 pundits out there that would be shocked by your "downsizing." Reality teaches us that confidence in a weapon can take you places...Karamojo or Selous for example.

Hope you don't think I'm "beating a dead horse" here...just having fun. If you get tired than just turn the computer off for awhile. I'll be here when you get back.

I always find the discussion of the 458 win mag, and its reported failings, to be interesting. It is especially poingent here, with the paraphrased comment, if 500 gr @ 2100 isn't enough, how can a 540 @ 1700 be better.

What one needs to always keep at the forefront of ones thoughts when comparing internal balistics, is the bullet, not the cartridge. The reason the 458 win mag has a checkered past is the 500 gr bullets used did not work consistantly when launched at 1900-2000 fps, and only when launched at 2300-2400 did they get high grades.

The 45-70 loads we are discussion use different bullets, and that is what we must keep in mind. I have no doubt that if you put the 500 gr jacketed bullets in a 45-70 and launched them at 1700 fps, you would not be happy with the results.

The fact is, the modern hardened lead ogival wadcutter cast bullet is a different animal then the soft lead bullets of days gone by. Whether a marked, or minimal increase in performance is provided by these bullets is yet to be seen.

We do know that jacketed bullets have made signifigant improvements over the years, perhaps the same thing has happened with cast?

It will be some time before I get to test the different rounds, perhaps in a year I'll have some results, will be interesting.

What do you think the result would be if the Garrett bullet (400gr) used in the 45/70 were loaded in a 458 to as high a velocity as possible? Would this be the better of both worlds....more velocity and a better bullet design?

I'll,

I'd be more partial to the 540 gr @ 2000 fps from the 458 win mag. I believe the ogival wadcutter cast bullets work best at 2000 fps or less, impacts at higher velocities cause the penetration to decrease, as the bullets start coming apart.

As far as alloys, I use straight wheelweights, cast hot they fill the molds fine, and if you drop them in a bucket of water from the mold, they are plenty hard. You can also shoot them w/o the water quench, and will get expansion. There are some more extensive heat treating meathods, but my motto is, maximum performance with minimal effort. If an air cooled or water quenched bullet won't do it, time to go jacketed.

DB Bill, some hard cast bullets launched at that velocity (~2400 fps) will start to expand or will fragment. Depends, obviously, on the alloy and the heat treatment. An equivalent comparison would be a TB Sledgehammer solid (or other non-deforming solid) at the same velocity.

I see several potential loadings for the 45-70 and buffalo:

Traditional:

350 gr (365 gr) softpoints and "solids" at 1700 fps (duplicates 450 BPE). The Speer FN will not expand at this velocity, so its a "solid" performing much like the old copper based lead bullets. Otherwise you could use a hardcast bullet. Of the 450 Taylor writes: I killed elephant, rhino and buffalo with the 365 gr hardened lead bullet, and lion with the soft solid bullet of the same weight...the rifle did great work for me, and was a real killer". In the case of the 450 Nitro, Taylor writes "there is nothing more effective than the plain soft nose, plenty lead showing, for buffalo or for frontal shots at lion", disdaining solids.

500 gr softpoints at 1700 fps (closely duplicates 500 BPE and Selous load). Taylor regarded the 480 gr soft lead bullet as "excellent" for dangerous game, though he mainly used the hardened lead solid for buffalo saying, "With the buffalo it was necessary to take heart and lung shots, and it would not have been pleasant to face a charge with only a lead bullet". Interestingly, Taylor regards the 500 Nitro as having far too much penetration even with softnoses for use on buffalo unless you take care to hit heavy bones.

540 to 570 gr hardcast solids at 1550 to 1650 fps (duplicates Selous loading). This is the super penetrator of the 1870s, which Selous adopted at a time when the equally current alternatives were 577 BPE, 10 bore and 8 bore.

Modern:

350 gr soft or "solid" at 2150 fps. This duplicates the "Nitro-for-Black" later loads for the 450 BPE.

500 gr soft or solid at 1700 to 1800 fps. Similar to Selous load but maybe a bit more depending on the rifle.

If you must satisfy a minimum KE standard of around 3500 ft-lbs ironically only the 350 gr loads will make it, until you get to the really fast 500 gr loads for the Ruger No. 1.

Thought you guys would like to see an e-mail from Randy Garrett to me tonight...

My question to Randy:

I was curious about your 45-70 bullets...in your testing what velocity did these bullets start to fail at and what is their BHN? I like your loads and some of us were talking about what would happen to your bullets if loaded in the 458 win mag (just gun talk for those of us who don't have anything better to do tonight). Thanks for your time and your excellent products."

Randy's reply:

The Brinnell hardness of our bullets runs about 25 points. Since we use a special low antimony alloy, we don't get bullet failure even when impacted at point blank range with our 1850-fps 45-70 load. However, even the best cast bullets will generally show some deformation when impact occurs at point blank range at those velocities. However, the great majority of game is engaged at ranges that don't overwhelm good cast bullets, and complete penetration usually occurs. Generally our 420-grainer will shoot through moose lengthwise, and our 540-grainer has never been stopped by any game including more than 20 buffalo. As to what our bullets would do at 458 velocities, I suspect they wouldn't perform as well. One must remember that the stress a bullet experiences upon impact is the product of the toughness of the target and the speed of impact. Anytime you speed up a bullet, it has the practical effect of weakening the bullet.

Best regards, Randy Garrett
www.garrettcartridges.com

I have invited Randy Garrett to join us on these 45-70 topics as he is quite knowledgeable as to what the 45-70 is capable of. Let's hope he accepts the invite.

[This message has been edited by yukon delta (edited 07-26-2001).]

Twenty dead buffalo and not one recovered bullet? Not too bad for a load that only generates 2880 ft-lbs at the muzzle (less than half the KE of a 458 Lott). Yukon, ask him how many shots were required to kill 20 buffaloes.

The 45-70 is one of my all time favorites, and I own, or have owned almost every type of rifle, or pistol ever chgambered for this old American war horse. It has killed lots of things over the world, and a few Cape Buffalo have bought the boat with this chambering.

Haveing said the above, it is my opinion, the 45-70 is one of the all time greats for North America, and at it's most effefective range, it can't be beaten for the great bears over bait. The same could probably said for the 45-70 for African lion OVER BAIT, with a real carefully crafted handload. It is also my opinion that the 45-70 is simply not a very good choice for Cape Buffalo.

Admittedly, this is only my opinion, but the opinion expressed is formed by my EXPERIENCE with both the 45-70, and the killing of Cape Buffalo. I think here in lyes the problem with this string. Most of the people posting opinions on this thread, have experience with the 45-70, "OR" Cape Buffalo, but not with both!

The pennetration tests are nice for something to put in a book for the arm chair hunter to read, and form opinion with. but they are not of much interst to an old DUGABOY BULL! So Though the so-called proof tests of the effectiveness of the 45-70 on Cape Buffalo are only opinion as well, so the high horse is shared with the opposition, and is no more credable the "OPINION" of the opposition!

It is my "OPINION" that to use a 45-70 on Cape Buffalo is not wise, but you may use what ever you please, just do me a favor, and let me know, before you do, if I'm in the immediate area!

As far as I'm concerened this string can

R.I.P.

------------------
..Mac >>>===(x)===>
DUGABOY DESIGNS
Collector/trader of fine double rifles, and African wildlife art

Mac, if you'll give this matter a last gasp before you pull the sheet over its head and summarily bury it, I'd like to pose you a question.

Granted, those of us writing here - for the most part - have not hunted buffalo with a 45-70. If we had we would likely know what we want to know and there'd be no need to ponder the question.

Since it is impractical to go out and shoot 100 buffalo with a 45-70 alongside 100 shot by 458 Win/450 Nitro and 100 by 458 Lott/450 Ackley/460 G&A and another 100 by 460 Wby/450 Rigby, we have suggested some tests to look at the holes made by these respective weapons.

Here's my question: If you were to see two holes of similar dimensions (over the typical depth of thorax), one made by a 45-70 and another made by a 450 magnum, would you be at all inclined to consider that the lesser weapon might be effective? And if not, what other attributes does the more powerful weapon possess that won't be seen in such a test?

In regard to bulls killed, how many would have to be killed with how many shots before you would judge that a particular weapon was effective (recognizing that the usual weapons do not deliver 1 shot kills very often)?

Considered evening out the playing field by building up a Siamese Mauser in 45-70 and chronographing? Navy Arms sold hundreds of them in the 1970's and early '80's. We saw 1850fps with the old Lyman 458560GC bullet.
A single groove slabsided 525-550gr GC bullet shallow seated might surprise you.
That said, I will stick to my Ruger #3 45-120 if I use a "heavy" in 45 calibre.

Rich

No matter what bullet is stuffed into a 45-70 case, the 45-70 just does not have enough powder capacity to get up to the accepted velocities of 2100-2400 fps to be considered a suitable dangerous game caliber.

And yes, I own a Marlin 45-70 and have shot several deer with it. I used Speer 400 gr FN bullets at 1750 fps, and the damage to deer was amazing. But that was deer...

500grains,

Just curious, how many dangerous game safaris have you been on? I can tell you from experience that a buffalo is only flesh and bone (not kevlar and steel). A 45-70 will definitely kill a buffalo if you put an appropriately designed bullet in the right place.

Todd E

Rich you have a Ruger #3 in 45-120? That sounds painful. Reminds me of someone who has a 50 Alaskan levergun with a steel buttplate!