45-70 effectiveness at 200yards?

[Nature Boy]

200yrds with a 45-70? No way. Those big ol’ punkin balls fall out of the sky once they cross 70 yards, and the bullets are flying so slowly they won’t expand unless you use extreme pressure Marlin Only loads, which will kick your arm clean off of your body, and you’d be much better off with a modern bottleneck cartridge...

Take your pick of misguided internet myths about the .45-70... as is often the case, reality is typically quite different...

If you can manage drop and are willing to invest 1) the time and ammo cost to learn the actual drops for your load, and 2) the money to equip a scope with either dialable turrets or a graduated reticle to allow you to better manage said drop, you’ll be happy out to about 350.

My processor calculated 315-325 live weight for this guy. He was hit by a factory Hornady 325grn FTX leaving that Marlin 1895 Guide Gun at 1795fps, at 250yrds. He ran a few yards, jumped a fence, and crumpled where he landed. The near lung was cut in half, heart turned to jelly, and the rear lung was shredded. The bullet stopped under the hide, outside of the rib muscles on the far side. It DID require 30” of hold over in the plex reticle Bushnell Elite 3-9x on top, but it obviously did the job.

View attachment 799474

That's a beast!

I'd have a hard time deciding whether to shoot it or put a saddle on it

 

[troy fairweather]

here is my 45/70 200 yards is easy knowing the drop. I want to try that barnes bullet for the socom with the point and push them as fast as possilbe. And see what the drop is.

 

[Varminterror]

That's a beast!

I'd have a hard time deciding whether to shoot it or put a saddle on it

He was a monster. We didn’t realize how big his body was until we walked out to him - even field dressed, and despite both of us being in great shape, my wife and I struggled terribly to drag him a quarter mile to the farm road. His rack really didn’t fit his body.

 

[ACES&8S]

I have spent literally hours behind my 45/70 1895 Marlin & then more hours reloading for it
until I have it the best it can be. Because that's what some reloaders do.
And yes it could take deer at 250 yards with practice, not as easily as a 7MM Mag.
Like Slamfire said, RANGEFINDER!

 

[LoonWulf]

I forgot to mention having a reticle with hold over can help. I had my muzzleloader scope on my SOCOM for a while, and it tracked pretty close to the hash marks. I never shot any game outside of 50yds, but I did whack the crap out of a few rocks at 250 pretty easily.

 

[Varminterror]

3.3 mils gets me to 250 with that factory FTX. That’s about 575yrds in 6 creed, for perspective, but it’s easily managed even with hold over, let alone dialing.

 

[jeepnik]

What's continually amazes me is that folks wonder if the 45/70 can kill at extended ranges. The darned thing was not designed to kill people. It was designed to kill cavalry horses. And the further out you do that, the faster you can break the charge. So 200 yds is a no brainer.

 

[cdb1]

It was designed to kill cavalry horses.

Never heard that before.

 

[Ks5shooter]

Practice,practice and perfect practice and you will have no problems. Get a steel gong made into the size of deer vitals place properly in front of a deer cardboard cutout,and have fun

 

[792mauser]

Smacks the bejeezus outa the 300 yard steel when I shoot it.
And with something that approaches regularity.

 

[Varminterror]

Practice,practice and perfect practice and you will have no problems. Get a steel gong made into the size of deer vitals place properly in front of a deer cardboard cutout,and have fun

I’m gonna flip the script on you - hang the cardboard IN FRONT of the steel. Putting the steel in front gives you an aiming point, putting the steel in the rear gives you a realistic silhouette, but positive feedback when a good shot is made.

 

[Llama Bob]

Never heard that before.

That was the basic objective.

.45-70 can retain good terminal behavior for a long ways since it doesn't necissarily need to expand. The problem is drop and wind. Drop is pretty easy to figure, but it's impossible to eliminate wind call error, and it's not uncommon for a .45-70 to have 4x or more the windage of an aerodynamic small bore hunting load. So keep it reasonable.

 

[Ks5shooter]

Varminterror,
Great idea

 

[Varminterror]

There ARE limits to elevation corrections:

A) Physical equipment limits - when your reticle and turrets run out of room, you’re stuck with a blind hold over (meaning the target is literally out of view). Without an aiming board, that’s a rough game. Unfortunately, with a scoped .45-70, we don’t have the same elevation adjustment range as a 4” tall ladder sight, and of course, a ladder sight has the problem of lacking magnification and dependence upon target form for POA placement. We run out of adjustment at much shorter ranges compared to Mach 2.5+ bottlenecks. He average 3-9x40mm will need an angled base or have to dial AND hold over to get past 300yrds, and would run out again even with a 20moa base to get past 550ish.

B) Rate of Drop vs. Range error - if you’re dropping more than an inch per yard, life gets pretty complicated. For 6 Dasher, that corresponds to about 1050yrds. That’s about 450yrds. So a LRF standard error of +/-1yrd means a difference of a couple inches of vertical error at 450 - about a half minute - for 45-70, whereas it only means about .2moa for 6 Dasher at 1050yrds.

C) Rate of Drop vs. Velocity error - the slower you run, the more your ES and SD matter. If your ES is 30, the 45-70 will have 6” of unresolvable vertical at 500yrds due to velocity spread - more than a full minute of angle. Comparatively, the 6 Dasher will only have 1.3” of unresolvable vertical at 500, a hair under a quarter minute of dispersion in your group.

I LOVE the .45-70, and love long range shooting - and I commonly advocate that most folks underestimate the range capabilities of the 45-70, but that’s the folks who call it a 50yrd cartridge. Getting out to mid-range (600yrds) with the 45-70 is a significant challenge.

And for all of the blackpowder guys - consider the targets we use at long ranges. When guys are shooting life sized bison targets at 1,000yrds, happy with an impact on target, not considering the vital zone - just the target. It’s a feat of marksmanship, without question, to run your elevator clear to the top floor and bang that gong at 1,000yrds, but the same level of skill with a bottleneck cartridge can print a 6-12” group on the bison, vs. something on the order of 3-4ft for the ol’ punkin’ chucker.

 

[someguy2800]

Add to the above that the deer in my neck of the woods have been well educated to not stand around in the open daylight while one fiddles with their range finder and dope chart.

I use mine as a 100 yard deer cartridge, not because of the cartridge but my own limitations. I my ability to estimate range past 100 yards isn't great and my peep sight is not easily field adjustable as it takes a small screwdriver. If I put a scope on it with a ranging retical and shot higher velocity loading I would be comfortable out to probably 250 on game. I have taken game out to 240 yards with my 444 marlin and it still has pretty good legs under it at that range.

 

[jeepnik]

Never heard that before.

During a cavalry charge it is darned hard to hit the relatively small man bouncing around on top of a horse. Shoot the horse and when it goes down you will with luck either kill or disable the man on top. And even if you don't injure the man, he is now on foot. He can't move off very fast and is much easier to hit.

Just why do you thing one of the thing Thompson and LeGarde did was shoot large animals in slaughterhouses when looking for data for a new pistol round. The .45 acp was to approximate the .45 colt and it was also designed to shoot horses. They also shot human corpses. I'm sure that shooting live humans would have been done if acceptable. At least their tests involve flesh and bone as opposed to the jello testing that the experts rely on today. That worker out real well for the FBI a few years back.

 

[troy fairweather]

I have seen old photos of long range rifles were the sights were on the side of the gun to give more addjustment the barrel is out the way then.

 

[someguy2800]

Remember the time the 45-70 was designed it was an evolution of a rifled musket. We went from the 58 caliber Springfield rifled musket to the first trapdoors which were a 58 caliber rimfire conversions of surplus muskets. The ballistics were rather poor so they soon re-lined the barrels and made the 50-70 centerfire. A few years of use taught us that was a bit much for an infantry rifle and the ballistics still we’re not great so the smaller 45 caliber cartridge won out in trials and the 45-70 was adopted for the 1873 trapdoor. Still the 45-70 was really just a black powder musket load put into a copper case for fast reloading.

At the time small bore bottleneck cartridges were not yet a thing. The first experimental bottleneck rounds were a few years earlier in the 1860’s but with only black powder as a propellant the best way to project lethal force out to 800, 1000, 1200, 1600 yards and beyond was still to throw a heavier bullet. A small bore rifle powered with black powder doesn’t have the legs to get out there. The civil war taught us you need to be able reach out across clearings, otherwise if the other side has a range advantage they will harass you with volley fire from a distance and put you on the offensive. This is why all the WW1 rifles still had volley sights with 1600 yard markings.

 

[d2wing]

I very much doubt the cavalry horse claim, The 45-70 was never used against cavalry. It was mostly a carbine used by cavalry in the Indian wars and considered a light gun at the time. I suppose you could consider mounted Indians Cavalry. With any cartridge placement is the key. It is great against a standing target at a known range. A moving target beyond 100 yards is going to be difficult to range and adjust holdover or sight accurately and quickly.

 

[darkcloud]

45/70 yes it will do the job. Little expansion if any but will bore a 1/2" hole through the critter. 50 cal ML. depends. Traditional front stuffer? NO. Not even with cast maxi's or some such other "bullet". Inline with with substitute black powder and a modern designed bullet designed specifically for them crafted into an accurate load? YES

 

[hq]

For what it's worth, I've used .45-70 (Marlin XLR, Hornady LeverEvolution 325gr) very successfully on whitetail-sized game at well past 200yd. The trajectory is a bit of a rainbow so be sure to know the distance and drop before you pull the trigger but terminal ballistics have been satisfactory, to say the least. Mainly DRT:s with reasonable bullet expansion.

The combination wore a low magnification Bushnell Trophy until it broke on me and was replaced with a Leupold 3-9x40 Ultimate Slam w/ Sabot Ballistics Reticle. Even though it's intended for muzzleloaders for up to 300yd, the drop compensation is spot on with the aforementioned combo at 0-300 meters. And, incidentally, my rangefinders are set on meters anyway.

So yes, .45-70 can reach out a bit, too. Not like fast bottleneck cartridges, obviously, but much further than the common "wisdom" "knows".

 

[Llama Bob]

I very much doubt the cavalry horse claim,

Both the .50-70 and .45-70 were tested on horses during trials, so it stands to reason that anti-cavalry performance was of interest.

 

[jmr40]

It was designed to kill cavalry horses.

Let's not get carried away. The 45-70 was the original poodle shooter with the military going from 58 caliber down to 45. Traditional black powder loads basically reproduce 45 caliber muzzle loader performance in a faster to load rifle. And that is the minimum legal caliber for deer in most states. Not legal for larger game in most states, certainly inadequate on horses.

It was designed to kill 140 lb Native Americans during the Indian wars. It was not very successful and was quickly dropped. As a hunting cartridge it was considered under powered for anything larger than deer during the 1870's and 1880's and with good reason. It was never widely used as a buffalo gun for several reasons. Mainly because most of the buffalo were dead 10 years before it was introduced. And laws were passed in 1874, one year after the 45-70 was introduced, banning buffalo hunting to preserve the handful left.

By the 1890's it was all but dead. From the 1890's until 1973 the 45-70 was a dormant cartridge that only saw use among a small group of target shooters who competed in black powder cartridge shooting matches. Hunters dropped it like a rock, rounds like 30-30, 6.5X55, 7X57 and the 30-06 were readily available by the early 1900's. Some as early as 1891.

In 1973 Marlin re-introduced their 1895 rifle chambered in 45-70 to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the 45-70 with lots of hyperbole and colorful advertising hinting that the cartridge had a lot more history than it really did. I had one of the originals back in the mid 1970's and a couple more over the years so I have some experience with 45-70 and Marlin lever guns.

Of course this is about the same time that modern loads that were safe to fire in the Marlin were introduced. Those loads bring the 45-70 into another league. But at the cost of what I consider excessive recoil. Black powder level loads are very tolerable, no more than 30-06. But many of the hotter modern loads exceed 375 H&H mag recoil and are right on the heels of 458 WM recoil. And in reality they don't kill anything a 30-06 won't kill just as well with 1/3 the recoil.

The short version is that traditional 45-70 loads are quite weak and the round wasn't well thought of during its military service during the 1870's and 1880's. With modern loads it will kill any animal that walks within a limited range. But during the 80 years the 45-70 was dormant and sleeping rounds like 6.5X55, 7X57, and 30-06 proved they would also kill any animal that walks. And do it at much longer ranges with a fraction of the recoil.

Can a 45-70 hit and kill a deer at 200 or even 300 yards. Yes, but that is hardly impressive, we have people killing elk at 1/2 mile with 243's.

 

[cdb1]

Never heard that before.

I’ve been a voracious reader my entire life. I read two to three books a week every week and have done so since the first grade. The reason for stating this is being that I do read so much, I’ve run across a fair amount of writing on the.45-70 and never have I seen killing cavalry horses mentioned.

I also don’t equate reading with first hand or hands on experience and knowledge.

 

[Varminterror]

Complaining about blackpowder load performance from almost 150yrs ago doesn’t make sense.

Recall, I much more recent history - ‘roundabouts 2003/4 if I recall, Brian Pearce killed two Cape buffalo with a single shot from .45-70. His shot on his target bull passed through and killed the cow standing silhouetted behind him. While it might not have been responsible for the great American bison eradication as some might have been mislead to believe, it’s certainly killed its fair share of them in modern era. I’ve taken one myself hunting with .45-70, and I’d guess a dozen others of the federal herd my family managed in the late 90s and early 2000’s. It’s pretty laughable to say it’s insufficient for whitetail or elk. Is the trajectory difficult to manage? Yup. Does it kill in the same way as a bottleneck smallbore cartridge? Nope. Does it give up anything for utility on these game species at 0-250yrds? Nope.