What was the original question

On my deer hunt last month, we had two guys with 45-70's, one 7 mag, and my 350 Rigby, well, one of the 45-70 guys also had a 338 win mag. The main reason for the much larger than typical deer calibers, was the islands population of larger than blacktail brown bears

Here are my thoughts from that hunt. The vegitation at shoreline is crazy thick, wished I'd brought a machete, nah, make that a chainsaw. When we jumped deer, you'd be lucky to get off a shot, the one I jumped was out of sight before my rifle got to my shoulder. A heavy rifle sucks when carried in your arms all day long. I suck at running shots, but didn't find the boltgun to be slow to opperate, I had no problem getting off 4 quick shots, it was placing those shots I had trouble with

Even though the vegitation is mega thick at shoreline, there are plenty of openings on the island and hence opportunities for 300+yd shots. There were several situations where the 45-70 guys didn't shoot due to range being too far. They also didn't fair better than I did on running game

Me thinks Rugers new 350 rem mag ss bolt gun is about the best combination of compact powerful reach out light weight reasonably priced hunting rifle, yup I plan on getting one. I'm also thinking a Kimber Montanna in 300 WSM would make a dandy deer rifle.

The two deer we harvested were taken by the 7 mag and 350 Rigby, and both at close range, go figure I never fealt that the 45-70 would have given me an edge over my 350, but did see where it would let me down. For really, really thick stuff an iron sighted DA revolver is the fastest to put into action, wished I'd had mine out when I jumped that deer.

I don't own a 45-70 (but would like to). I do have a vintage Winchester 45-90 that I hunt with and for all practical purposes is a 45-70 equivalent with smokeless powder. I have taken a grizzly bear at about 30 paces with it and two bull moose, each at about 100 yards. All were shot with 355 gr. cast GC bullets moving out around 1850 fps. The bear received three successive hits to make sure he didn't leave the relatively small opening in the willows he was in. Each bull received one shot. I will say that the rifle/bullet combination was quite effective.

It isn't the best round for the task but I enjoy hunting with this relic nonetheless.

And JBabcock, I recognize that cabin at Tell Ya' Later Creek. Your secret is safe with me.

Hey Dimrod,

How are you. Merry Christmas to you and yours. I had a picture of you and that monster you shot with your 45-90 some place, but can't find it. If you send another to me I'll post it. That was a nice Fall bear.

That dredge on "Tell ya later creek" is the nicest I've ever seen. The glass isn't even broken out of it. Scott and I were standing there admiring it and that's when I noticed the bear trail leading up to it. Very cool place.

jdbabcock@integrity.com

quote:

I can't seem to understand why so many people seem to be threatened and negative about 45/70.

This really doesn't apply to those who own and/or hunt with a rifle/cartridge combo that makes more sense than a 45-70, like me for example.

I have never felt the need to cast desparaging remarks about your rifle/cartridge, cause I feel you should use what you want and what works for you. What makes "sense" to you might not neccessarily make "sense" to me. I never said it was perfect for all situations or even a good all around cartridge/rifle combination. I just like it and find it very useful for a lot of my hunting.

I honestly feel sorry for people who feel they need to only use one gun for all thier hunting, I enjoy my different rifles. Granted if forced to choose only one I would probably be best served with my 9.3x62 or 375 H&H, or even my 338 RUM. I just like using my 45/70, hell I've been known to enjoy using a bow from time to time also.

*** THREATENED AND NEGATIVE ABOUT THE
GREAT , .45-70 ? ***

Can't figure why anyone would be threatened by the .45-70 , it's a great cartridge within the limitations of what it works well for .

Guess I could be called negative about it , on some posts , -- but, I believe , the only thing I feel strongly about is in context of over zealous .45-70 fans , that recommend it to novice hunters and outdoorsmen as an Ideal Bear Defense weapon .

It ain't a bad one , by any stretch , but I do not believe it is ideal for , especially ; ---large Bears , and Close-range attacks .

To me that's not being arbitrarily Negative on the old Classic , it's just facts and ballistics .

' Spose I could just as well ask , -- why are some .45-70 fans so DETERMINED to stretch a fine , but limited cartridge , to be the end-all , be-all , of all rifles .

------------- MMCOUGAR .

I just finished reading this entire thread. Great stuff. I may just have to go get me another Marlin 1895! I've still got brass, just need dies, powder and bullets.

I've sold off all my rifles except the 338's, a 7mm Rem Mag, and my 223. So that means there's room in the safe...

But, I still won't take it to Alaska to hunt with. Not as a visiting hunter on a limited time frame.

Close range izallitz good fer! 10 yards Just a glorified lil' popgun. W

In the late 1800's the buffalo hunters shot the largest buffalo at extreme distances,some close to 500 yards with the black powder loaded 45/70,the custers last stand monument in eastern Montana has records of military shooters shooting at 600 yards.Is that an arc or what?I own many rifles chambered for 22-338 win mag and even a 35 Whelen so I could change rifles for longer distances but the folks back then could not do that,they learned the arc and worked with it,the punch at the end of the arc was still enough to kill the animal.I own a 45/70 and enjoy it so I say shoot what ever makes you smile,if its a 338 win mag then do so but if the 45/70 is the tickler then skin it back,the 45/70 has been getting the job done for well over 100 years.Drop-Shot

I will use a 45-70 while busting brush or from a tree stand, where the range is short. The bone smashing ability of the 45-70 is great close up. I use the Buffalo Bore ammo or hand load to match their ballistics. But for a primary hunting rifle here in Alaska I carry a .338 Win Mag.

Taking a 45-70 hunting to Alaska is just like taking a 30-30 leveraction deer hunting these days.I have only seen one guy hunting with a 45-70 here in the interior.If you hunt with a 45-70 you are limiting yourself to close range.I hunt in the open tundra where 300 yards is usually a close shot on bears and caribou.You can get closer to moose but why limnit yourself to close range.You would also wish you had a stainless fiberglassed stocked rifle after a few days in the rain.None of the rifles I huhnt with in Alaska are blued or have wood stock.Its fun sometimes to hunt with the older designed guns but if you bring a nice walnut stocked rifle plan on it to be almost ruined after about 10 days of hunting.Alaska is tough on guns if you dont mind ruining your stock and your gun rusting so much it will hardly work and limiting yourself to around 150 yards a 45-70 with hot loads go for it.I will stick to my stainless 338 win mag or my 338-378 for longer range critters.

DGR416 what make is your 338 win mag?I have an older post 64 70,I would like to update that rifle some day to a stainless.When I jump hunt elk and moose I like the 45/70 open sights,shots are seldom over 50 yards but I have taken a muley at 200 yards,took 2 shots 1 to see how much the bullet dropped that far and the other to take him cleanly.When you do connect with any animal with a 45/70 it kills cleanly.For long shots I prefer my 300 weatherby mag.Drop-Shot

I have two Ruger Stainless mark II 77 in 338 , 5 older Ruger Mark I 77s, one winchester model 70 stainles with a boss.I think the Ruger 77 stainless mark II 338 are tough as nails for Alaskan hunting.I tricked out my wonderful Mark I ruger 77 338 that was broken up when I bought it.Its cromed with a plastic stock.My favorire Ruger 338 besides old faithful I have been hunting with for 20 something years is my mark II with a liminated stock.It shoots sweet as heck.All my 338s will shoot 1" at 100 yards ,some shoot under 1" at 200 yards.I could have shot my first caribou with a 45-70 but it was a spike and I turned it down.I dont think the 450 marlin will replace the 45-70 like they thought.I bet it will be gone in 5 years or less.

So it seems most Alaskans here own a 45-70?and like it as well. Most of us seem to agree on one thing that it performs very well up close and in the bushes where it works like the thumper it is. I generally am known to carry two rifles a scoped rifle of .30-06 on up to my .375RUM and my Marlin, the old weak pop gun. My .338-06 is not quite near completion but it will be going out with my lever gun as well soon-lots of small lakes, swamp and brush, quite the country.

This is an excellent thread. I spent an hour and 3 beers on it. When I hunted brown bear in Alaska in 2004, I carried a 300 win mag and thought it was a little underpowered and wished I had a 338 or 375 instead. I never even considered a 45-70. Now that I think back, in the areas I hunted along the Chulitna river east of Denali Nat'l Park, a 45-70 would have been fine because most of the likely shots would've been within 100 yards. The 45-70 would have been especially good for those times when we hiked in to some hunting spots on skinny game(i.e. grizzly) trails with alder all around. I'm doing a black bear hunt in eastern Canada this Spring with some bowhunters and I'm taking a Marlin 1895 in 45-70 for the job. The cast bullet information in this thread has been very informative. What I have gathered from some other sources is that kinetic energy is not necessarily proportional to killing potential. I don't know how to quantify it, but there's just some incredible stopping power inherent in a large diameter non-expanding cast bullet even with it's slower velocities vs. a smaller caliber, faster, jacketed bullets. It's something that buffalo hunters of 100 plus years ago (and today) know all about.

slatts...now you will have to join the "we band of 45-70ers"

Interesting, I have kept out of this conversation but Drop-Shot has a point. In the 1880's the military did some interesting shooting trials with the Springfield 45-70. They discovered that the maximum effective range was 3900 yards. With practice one of their shooters was able to consistently hit a 6 foot target at 2500 yards. That is excellent shooting and I think anyone with a 338 would be hard pressed to achieve the same degree of accuracy (try it with open sights). Today the BPCR shooters are hitting the 30 inch target at 1000 yards 40+ out of 50 shots and all with open sights! Looking at all the discussions, I may be one of the only ones using the 45-70 on game here in Alaska. I have taken quite a few caribou with both the Marlin and Sharps. They kill caribou with authority. I have taken caribou out to 300 yards with the Sharps (black powder loads) and 150 with the Marlin. You have to know your trajectory and yardage but both will kill as far as you can see! Don't get me wrong, I use an 06 and 338 too. Just don't disparage the old work horse until you learn how to employ it. And no, I do not feel undergunned when I encounter a "big brown furry thing" with either rifle. Jim

I use a Marlin Guide Gun in 45-70 with 350 grain Hardcast FNGC with RL 7 @ 2000 FPS. Sure is sweet little rifle to carry in the bush. I never go hunting without it. Good grouse gun also......takes their head right off!

Great Thread. It reinforces the seeming fact that 45-70 fans are a bit crazed about their choice. It's more a religion than a caliber choice. (Don't hurt me)

I am no Alaskan but have lived in Nunavut/NWT since 1988 and have done a lot of hunting, from seals, caribou to moose and buffalo. I bought a ported 450 marlin when they came out largely for bear protection outside of hunting season. It's MOA accurate, light, powerful and easier to abuse in the canoe than my fairly rare Rem 660,350 Rem Mag.

I have only harvested caribou with the 450 and it's certainly powerful but when hunting I feel handicapped. It's definately not a long ranger and moose hunting there is always the chance for a long shot.

Also the penetration of a heavy slow bullet is fantastic but the shocking power is not as high as I would like. This summer I was shooting at the gravel pit and started an imprompto experiment shooting down into some soaking mud flats.

The 450 made a deep and narrow hole that deepened and narrowed as bullet weight went up and speed went down. My 358 Norma made craters that can only be desribed as awe inspiring. I was also showered with mud from the sky as the impact created lots of secondary missiles. No such effect occured with the 450 even with 300 grain bullets at 2200ft/sec, and certainly not with 460's at 1500.

Give me a 250 Nosler at 2900ft/sec anyday. I also know what this combination does to Bison....holy crap.