The Accurate Reloading Forums
450 alaskan vs 45-70 case capacity/performance
08 April 2006, 23:19
boom stick450 alaskan vs 45-70 case capacity/performance
what is the case capacity diff between them and performance diff???
is it better to do the 475-70 or the 475-alakan or the 50 alaskan on a guide gun in terms of cost to performance ratio?
09 April 2006, 00:46
boom stick i think it needs to be about .538 at the shoulder for a better shoulder and capacity and a caliber length neck...call it a 450 alaskan improved...
09 April 2006, 00:56
BohicaDear Boom,
According to my Accuload data the 450 Alaskan holds 97.0 gr water. The 45-70 has 79.0. This is to the top of the case I believe. Good luck!!
Aloha, Mark
When the fear of death is no longer a concern----the Rules of War change!!
09 April 2006, 01:17
boom stickthanks bohica...
what do y'all think of my 450 alaskan improved???
09 April 2006, 02:24
NFMikeIt's called a 450-348 Ack. .535 at the shoulder.
09 April 2006, 02:49
boom stickgreat! thanks nfmike...
do you know if it is a caliber length neck and at what length of case or what velocities it is getting?? trying to get as close to 500@ 2150 as possible...
thanks again...
09 April 2006, 07:22
NFMikeBS
Forget about it. That is the velocity it should be driving 400s NOT 500s. If anyone was fool enough, I suppose a 500 could get to 1950+.
Starting with the 348 case, the neck-up will shorten it to ~2.10 to 2.15". Suppose you could start with one of the new 50 cal cases and keep the parent 2.25" but it serves no purpose as the COL will be the limiting factor more than case length. The powder has no ego and don't give a flying rat's butt how long the case is.
I'm quite sure it does not have a caliber length neck.
09 April 2006, 09:53
boom stickstill thats pretty awesome...
350 gr nosler partitions should fly pretty fast out of it.
thanks for the info.
some kind of a.i. 458,50-110 should do the trick...
10 April 2006, 10:57
Zeglinquote:
Originally posted by NFMike:
That is the velocity it should be driving 400s NOT 500s.
Mike is right on this one, just not enough fuel capacity for that kind of velocity.
10 April 2006, 11:34
boom stick500's @ 1950 is all anyone would need for mean and nasty up close in the americas...that is good enough...i'll assume 350's @ 2300?
10 April 2006, 19:16
Rogerquote:
quote:
Originally posted by NFMike:
That is the velocity it should be driving 400s NOT 500s.
Mike is right on this one, just not enough fuel capacity for that kind of velocity.
Boom,
That was the chrono'ed velocity I was getting with 400's. The load was 67 grains of 3031. The average fps was 2156. Really didn't want to push it any harder as recoil was very stiff. The lever on the 71 would sometimes start to drop on it's own.
Don't know about the 500's as I didn't load for those.
Roger QSL
Fred Zeglin
Specialist in Custom Hunting Rifles
11 April 2006, 19:41
Rogerquote:
quote:
Originally posted by NFMike:
That is the velocity it should be driving 400s NOT 500s.
Mike is right on this one, just not enough fuel capacity for that kind of velocity.
Boom,
That was the chrono'ed velocity I was getting with 400's. The load was 67 grains of 3031. The average fps was 2156. Really didn't want to push it any harder as recoil was very stiff. The lever on the 71 would sometimes start to drop on it's own.
Don't know about the 500's as I didn't load for those.
Roger QSL
Correction on my post.
Thru lousy computer work, placed Fred Zeglin's name at the bottom of my post. Should not have been there. Sorry Fred.
Roger QSL