45-70 as "200 yard limit?" Uh,... ???

[BigBore44]

Ok first off, I love my 45/70. I know that when I'm in the woods I am never under gunned. No matter what woods I'm in. I spend a fair amount of time shooting that rifle and am quite confident in my abilities. I am more than confident in my cartridge's abilities. 405 gr bullets at 1500 fps will take any animal on the planet. Period. But would/should I shoot that round at any animal at 500+ yards? I think the answer is no. Can it be done? Sure it can. Can it kill at that distance? Absolutely. But as an ethical hunter, there are too many variables for me to take that shot. It's an animals life I'd be risking to say "Yeah, I did that." We already know it's possible. Ballistics tables prove it's lethality at that distance. So what are we going to prove? Are we going to prove the mathematics are correct? That's what it seems like to me. That's not impressive. You're just proving something that has already been proven. So why? Even if you do it people will just say you got lucky and discount it as that. And then there will be those that also want to try it so they can join the "500 yd 45/70 hunting club".

If you decide to accept the challenge made earlier and take that shot, I hope like hell you miss. Lobbing bullets at living animals just to say you did it is NOT THR. Push your limits at the range, not in the field.

 

[Jim Watson]

I am a target shooter and while I enjoy "lobbing" bullets at artificial targets, I know my first round hit range is limited in comparison. I would not take a shot at a game animal at anything like match ranges. And I don't limit that to black powder, either.

I recall reading that there were a lot of Sharps and other single shot rifles in the various .44 calibers during the years of the big buffalo hunts. I don't think the hunters considered the .45-75 Sharps Straight to be an underpowered cartridge. (That was the Sharps version of the .45-70 Government.) Billy Dixon was shooting a borrowed .50 Something at Adobe Walls. I wonder what that young upstart Masterson had. The less well known Jack Bean was partial to a .44 and with scope sight at that.

 

[Don McDowell]

I don't recall anybody in this thread advocating long range shots in this thread, but there are folks that know it could be done..
If d2 was relaying info from Frank Mayers buffalo harvest he got things somewhat buggered up. Mayer says his rifle was a 40-90 bn, and he bought a 40-70 for a light rifle for antelope etc, but did not think it powerful enough for buffalo. But then he goes off on how good the 45-120-550 was , but that cartridge didn't come out until late 77 or 78..
The biggest problem with Mayers book is the timeline he gives doesn't line up with the timeline of the rifles and cartridges he talks about. His account of the last buffalo he shot was while he was "in Wyoming along the Musselshell".. The mouth of the Musselshell is 150 miles north of the Wyoming border.. It sort of a fun read, but a grain of salt needs to go along with most of what's in there.

 

[eastbank]

this deer was hit by a 300gr hornady bullet starting out at about 1250fps at the muzzle,the shot was at about 150yds and the bullet would have just about the same speed as a hot loaded 300gr bullet at 500yds. aiming point was daylight just over the back with a 4x leupold scope and leaning on a tree trunk. this deer became dead very quickly,maybe it was a soft deer as the bullet didn,t stop. a .308 178gr a-max bullet starting out at 2700fps in a 7.62x51 sniper rifle has 1170fps at 1000yds and 541 fpe along with 488" of drop. the US services have been killing bunchs of enemy soldgiers for 40-50 years with the 7.62x51 sniper rifles out to 1000 yds. thats why i think the 45-70 could kill deer at 500yds with a rifle set up for it. and we know there are people who could not hit a deer at 50yds with a modern rifle(7mm,270,308), but that does not mean it can,t be done under the right conditions. sorry for any errors in penmenship. eastbank.

 

[d2wing]

Yes Don, that's why I said it may be fictional. Some things in that book could not true. I just do not know how much. Many first hand accounts mention the 50/90, but Sharps sold many in .44 cal such as the .44/100 and others. But powder capacity could be varied in the Sharps but not the Remington as I understand it. There is more to the story than meets the eye.
I certainly do not understand using a cartridge not suited to a purpose when there are so many that do it easily.

 

[tahunua001]

it has nothing to do with energy or speed, it has to do with the trajectory. those bullets drop a LOT at 400 yards and unless you shoot a LOT and know exactly what the wind speed is, what range you are shooting and and that animal is standing completely still your odds of even hitting a hog or deer are very slight.

 

[fiftybmg]

I loaded my Marlin 45-70 with 350gr bullets at 1850 fps, and it was hard to hit exactly where I was aiming at the 100 yard mark, with iron sights.

To make that cartridge reach 400 yards on target with a 400 grain bullet needs exceptional shooting, even with a very large scope.

 

[coyote315]

"and unless you shoot a LOT and know exactly what the wind speed is, what range you are shooting and and that animal is standing completely"


UH- why would you take a shot if you DIDN'T know those things??!?!

 

[coyote315]

SO, we're all in agreement that the 45/70 will kill whatever it hits at double the original "200 yard limit" on the post, and now we'll argue bitterly about who is capable of doing what over the internet, and who can ethically produce what result... the "if you got proficient enough..." part of my original post. (My favorite part was when I asked about doubling 200 yards and the discussion instantly became hitting buffalo at one thousand).
Look guys, if you're not 100% certain you're going to cleanly kill something, at any range, ever, why would you shoot at it outside of combat? That said, let me know if you've never missed anything. My most fun "long range" hunt was on a deer in a bean field I've been hunting since I was 14, with a .35 remington that I had a log book for my handloads on for a few years and an info sheet taped to the stock. Hit a feeding doe broadside at 271 yards, 2step drop and dead. Of course, I watched her for about 20 minutes and made certain I had her pattern right and time of flight is pretty quick at 2100 fps (muzzle). The shot came in about one inch higher than I wanted, but I was satisfied. It's all relative. I wouldn't think that shot would be any less possible based on the math I see for a 45/70. Was it a "long shot" Not by distance; would've been chip for my .308, but for that rifle I felt it was long range and I enjoyed it because I knew all the weaponized math was correct. I wasn't starting a thread on that. I, the OP, got the terminal ballistics question I asked answered, so, thank you gentlemen. Enjoy your vitrol-ridden angst judging the ethical decisions and poor marksmanship practice of people you'll probably never meet outside of the interwebs.

 

[coyote315]

The reasonable, ethical kill zone on a whitetail is about a 6" circle, especially using a 400gr 458 cal bullet. The ballistic curve on the hornady factory 325 load puts the difference between 200 and 225 yards right at 6", so you'd miss all to hell and gone of the kill zone if you were off in your range estimation at that distance. (make certain you got your angle of sight correct!)

 

[Art Eatman]

This pore ol' hoss is pretty well done in.