Quote:

---

And even though it's now obsolete for military use, the 30-06 is far more versatile than the 45-70 is as a hunting cartridge in just about every way.

Absolutely true. Did somebody say the .45-70 was more versatile than the .30-06? I didn't, and I can't find a post here on this thread of anyone who did.


Then along comes the 458 Win. Mag. in 1956, and almost immediately that cartridge became suspect due to the fact that it's short on case-capacity.

Interesting statement, as that cartridge really and truly did have some problems early on. But were those actually due to a muzzle velocity of 1950 fps to 2000 fps or due to the provable failures caused by early powder clumping, bad bullets, etc. I have read so much argument over this subject that I am really curious as to what the facts are. Many with vast experience with the .458 even in its early years had nothing but praise for it. The actual failures I have read about were due to poor load practices or bad early powders. Your point is well-taken as far as early ammo is concerned, but is the .458 considered a "dog" now...?

And now the 45-70...is the modern do-everything wunder cartridge, huh?

Again, not sure where you are getting this stuff. Has somebody here said this? Or is this statement based on other threads? I've never suggested such a thing at all. I've asked if anyone has extensive experience shooting heavy game with something along the lines of a .45/540/1550 load. Have you seen failures with such a load? Please, if you have, I for one am all ears. I'd love to read of documented results with such a load on Aussie or African buff or US bison or even stock cattle or other heavy game. You are making some wild accusations. Maybe they are based on proclamations from .45-70 devotees from other threads? If so, please specify, since I don't read anybody doing what you accuse here on this thread.

I don't think so.........not for any hunting purpose that I'll ever need to fill. In fact, I've been so turned-off by some of this 45-70 froth in recent years that I'll never own one, pure and simple.AD

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

The 458 Win. Mag. has had a checkered career in its own right, yet it's considerably faster and more versatile than the 45-70 is, and I have personally used it on dangerous African big game such as buffalo and hippo, as well as plainsgame. It's a better dangerous game cartridge than the 45-70 is (it couldn't be any other way), and the faster 458s and 416s are better yet. So the 45-70 loses that battle by default.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

If that .50 lever rifle was is .50 Alaskan, I'd put all the blame on the shooter, not the rifle or cartridge. Going bigger wouldn't help if it made him shoot worse (other than a total miss not requiring going into the bush) if anything I'd rather him shoot less gun that he can actually shoot well with. .50 Alaskan isn't .45-70.

---

Smicha:

Wake up!!! You entirely miss the point!!

It is obvious that an unknown .50 caliber levergun shooting unknown bullets at an unknown velocity under unknown conditions with unknown shot placement is all we need to know that the 540/1550 load in the .45-70 is no good for anything.

I once shot a stray barn cat in the head with a .44 Special. It ran away after taking the shot. That too proves the .45-70 is no good for deer hunting. I once missed a deer with the .303 British. That proves that the .300 Weatherby won't kill a pronghorn...

--------------------
What are the Rosary, the Cross or the Crucifix other than tools to help maintain the fortress of our faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God?

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Needless to say the shot wasn't perfect and the result was poor.
Interesting!!!

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

It it was Scovil - he should have known better. The Winchester 50-110 and the .45/90 as well, have too slow rifling twists for the length of the bullets used in them. They were meant for very short-for-calibre bullets, which didn't help matters. This resulted in poor penetration, such that the Winchester .45 and .50 cal rifles were the laughing stock of the buffalo plains. RCBS made or makes a mould for a .510" 450gr. which, if driven 2,000fps or over, cast of WW metal which was then hardened, would have done the job given proper shooting. Trouble is, the 450gr. bullet is too long for the 32"(.45/90) to 56"(.50-110) rifling (jury is out on the twist actually used) twist of those leverguns. I have seen 'duplication' .50 Wnchester barrels for sale for the .50/95 and .50/110 that have 56" twists. This is a round ball twist in .50 to .60 calibre, not a slug twist.
; The .50 Alaskan with a proper 15" to 24" twist is very much different than the .50-110 Winchester in both power and penetration. The high velocty load for the .50-110 was a short light 350gr. at sometihg like 2,200fps, while a strong lever gun will do about 2,000fps with a 450gr. .50 bullet. Chambered in a strong, single shot action, the Alaskan will do about 2,100fps wihth a 520gr.
; Buckbrush, I doubt this was the incident mentioned. Could have been though, you just never know.

---

Scovill's rifle was built by Doug Turnbull Restorations from a original .45 caliber 1886. it was rebarreled with a 1-20" twist half octagon/round barrel from Montana Rifleman. he hunted with Martin Pieters of Rann Safaris in Botswana and yes he burned blackpowder in that rifle with that RCBS 450gr. bullet you mention Daryl. i have the DVD "10 days in africa" from wolfe publishing with Scovill's buffalo hunt and some plains game. he shoots that buffalo 6 or 7 times and you can see the dust flying off the buff with each hit. he wrote the buff hunt up in Successful Hunter mag and said the most bullets exited and were all in the vitals FWIW. Daryl, i see in quite a few posts you really like the 50 alaskan. it is an excellent close range thumper. i have a Browning 1886 converted to 50-110 with a 1-20" twist and using 50 Alaskan load data i can easily drive a 525gr. LBT LFN 2000+ fps from the 26" barrel. that cresent butt plate maakes it no fun though.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

AD:

.

Second, everyone knows the .45-70 is a better elephant cartridge than the .577 NE. It's also a better anti-aircraft cartridge than the 88mm Flak, too. The .45-70 also shoots flatter than the .300 Weatherby, kicks less than the .243, and is quieter than a .22. EVERYONE agrees with all of this.

Yes, and the .45-70 is going to replace the 5.56 as the NATO standard cartridge, too. Hoppdoc said that. And let's not forget that Daryl sank a German U-Boat in 1943 with a 500 grain cast bullet launched at 1100 fps from the .45-70. And I've killed 574 ground squirrels with the .45-70 in a Trapdoor Springfield with a 16x Unertl scope mounted on it, the same gun I loaned to Sam Fadala who used it to shoot 1000 elephants after slaying 17 blue whales off the coast of Patagonia. All of this is fact and all attested to in the thread. Marrakai mentioned he has a belt-fed .45-70 that he used to shoot enough kangaroos to feed the entire dog populations of Sydney, Perth and East Timor.

---

Yep ...the 45-70 does it all.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Perfectly stated, Nitro.

I was not aware of ".45-70 Wars" till informed of their existence in this thread {and a PM sent by a member}.

I do not understand why some want to suppress the investigation of improved loadings of any cartridge, so the blowup over .45-70 experimental or other heavy loads really left me confused.

Honestly, I thought this post was being handled well, without hyperbolic worship of the silly cartridge, till it was condemned wholesale. Your post here is very helpful.

Maybe I am wrong, but I see a forum such as you have here as a place where experimentation and investigation and subsequent discussion can flourish, and where unknowns can be discussed based on the knowns. If a fellow says "I don't think that will work, based on my experience with this" I listen up. But when a fellow says "It's no good but I haven't used it" I get bored with such a forum fast. They are a dime a dozen...

On that last note, and NOT particularly applying to this thread, for some time I thought this place was different than some others. But there appears to be a member or two who though very knowledgeable in some areas, constantly enters threads by belittling and denigrating others and by acting totally belligerently. Interestingly enough, such belligerence appears to frequently involve areas of weakness. I myself enjoy a debate but it is becoming more and more obvious to me over time as I read many posts {lots of which I do not even enter} that this like other forums, seemingly has its protected Sacred Cows and Heroes and since constant belligerence from any member makes for boring reading to me, it is easy to drift away, which is I suspect the normal way of things.

Thanks for your excellent summation here. You always have a valuable word to add.

---

Post Extras: