Why is the 45-70 so popular?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jason_W said:
It's bound to happen in any thread about a round that has a decent or at least decently vocal fan club. the .30-06 fanboys must challenge the .45-70 fanboys and vice versa. We live in a time where we all have to prove the ultimate superiority of our personal favorite everything, lest we lose man-points.
Click to expand...
It's the "I'd rather push my Chevy than drive a Ford" mentality. Never ending, never helpful, and never interesting.
 
furburgler said:
Don't have a 45 70 yet but it's on my wish list. Just wanted to say if the 30 06 is 50 to 150 fps faster than the 308 with heavier bullets wouldn't that actually mean it is better... I mean anything you shoot with isn't going to notice the difference but it is faster even if it's a just a slight amount...
Click to expand...
Welcome to THR furburgler.:)
 
Jason_W said:
It's bound to happen in any thread about a round that has a decent or at least decently vocal fan club. the .30-06 fanboys must challenge the .45-70 fanboys and vice versa. We live in a time where we all have to prove the ultimate superiority of our personal favorite everything, lest we lose man-points.
Click to expand...
Seems to be the case. I've never understood the need to choose one favorite and crap on all the rest.
 
ClickClickD'oh said:
To answer the OP: Because this is a damn sexy gun and by law the only thing that it is allowed to eat is .45-70

cq5dam.web.835.835.jpeg
Click to expand...

I feel honored to have held an original Springfield .45-70 in my hands, but never shot it.
I'm unsure of the model, since it was 40+ years ago.
 
Llama Bob said:
Considering there is no cataloged Woodleigh 240gr, that might be a bit difficult. If you just got confused and really mean the 220gr, then loading to 2.8" OAL with about 46.8gr of RL17 depending on your exact brass will get you 2575 ft/s at SAAMI max pressure. 26" barrel.

Now if you really did mean a 240gr, it'll be about 10% longer than the 220gr - say no longer than 1.5" - and you should be able to drive it to 2415 ft/s at SAAMI max, again with RL17.

So in fact, not only can we "talk" but your post was brought to the table by interior ballistics ignorance :D

I'll say it again - .308 only gives up between 50 and 150 ft/s of velocity to .30-06 depending on the bullet, all else being equal. If one has acceptable terminal ballistics, so does the other. They're both good or both bad.
Click to expand...


But saying it over and over again won't make it true.
 
RPRNY said:
But saying it over and over again won't make it true.
Click to expand...
You know, if you had any data of value comparing max pressure loads either from simulation or a strain gauge I might listen to you. But you've presented nothing of the sort. I don't think you understand what real data for this sort of question even looks like. You've just got a fetish for the .30-06 and want to pretend you know something.
 
Llama Bob said:
You know, if you had any data of value comparing max pressure loads either from simulation or a strain gauge I might listen to you. But you've presented nothing of the sort. I don't think you understand what real data for this sort of question even looks like. You've just got a fetish for the .30-06 and want to pretend you know something.
Click to expand...


No. Once again, I own rifles in both and enjoy them both.

At lower bullet weights up through the 160s, their performance is much of a muchness. Your insistence that the muchness remains at 180 and above is simply untrue and your denial of the facts presented to you demonstrate that investing in fact based dialogue with you on this subject is a poor use of resources. Repeating your fake ballistics over and over does not make them true and you cannot change the fact that the 308 Win does not deliver equivalent performance to the 30-06 with heavier bullets anymore than you can suggest a rifle chambered in such caliber would manage 220 grs or larger bullets with anything like 3 0-06 performance. I'm not sure that I would ever see a use for anything bigger than 220 grs in 30 cal, but I do know it wouldn't fly in 308 Win, even in your imaginary 1:10 26" barrel.
 
You're blathering. I provided loads, with pressures, powdered, lengths, the whole works that proved you wrong. There is no large performance gap between .308 and .30-06 with heavy bullets. It's a very small gap. Just so it is crystal clear to everyone, here are the fastest possible SAAMI loads for a 220gr. Woodleigh loaded in .308 and .30-06 within SAAMI specs:

Held constant
-------------------------
Barrel length: 24"
Bullet: Woodleigh catalog # 65C - 220 grain round nose soft nose
Bullet length: 1.275" (per catalog)
Maximum loading ratio 105% (stick powders), 100% (ball powders)

Specific to .308
-------------------------
Max pressure (MAP): 62KPSI (per SAAMI - http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/publications/download/206.pdf )
OAL: 2.810" (max per SAAMI cartridge diagram - same pdf)
Case geometry and H2O capacity per QuickLoad

Specific to .30-06
-------------------------
Max pressure (MAP): 60KPSI (per SAAMI)
OAL: 3.340" (max per SAAMI)
Case geometry and H2O capacity per QuickLoad

Now, if we run every US-available powder against those specifications to find the fastest, here's what we get - top 2 powders for each:

.308
-------------------------
46.9 grains of Alliant RL-17 for a muzzle velocity of 2541 ft/s and a MAP of 62KPSI
46.2 grains of Vihtavuori N550 for a muzzle velocity of 2494 ft/s and a MAP of 62KPSI

.30-06
-------------------------
61.9 grains of Alliant RL-26 for a muzzle velocity of 2694 ft/s and a MAP of 60KPSI
59.5 grains of IMR 7828 SSC for a muzzle velocity of 2649 ft/s and a MAP of 60KPSI

As always, start down 5-10%, work up, use a chrono, and don't exceed the listed velocity even if you don't see pressure signs.

There is nothing "fake" about this data. These are the facts. The difference is small - 153 ft/s. It's worth noting that per the Woodleigh catalog, the recommended impact velocity range for the #65C bullet is 2000-2400 ft/s. So in fact both cartridges are capable of driving it faster than is recommended. Thus in practice there is literally NO difference between the two as you would be wise to download either to 2400 ft/s.
 
RPRNY said:
Fake ballistics. Are they from the CNN Load Data Manual? You have manipulated data to make the 308 compare favorably. It's sad.
Click to expand...
You are a complete loony toon. Wow.

Incidentally, if anyone has any doubt that .308 220gr. loads in excess of 2400 ft/s are possible, take a look at handloader #57. They offer two additional loads with W-760 and N-205. Neither is as good a powder as RL-17 (which wasn't available in 1975) in terms of pure speed, but they're very reasonable choices.
 
Last edited:
Enjoy your fantasies and fetishes, it's still a free country. As this thread is still about the 45-70 and has been sidetracked enough, I'm happy to school you two some more on your duplicitous ways in another thread.
 
Llama Bob said:
You're blathering. I provided loads, with pressures, powdered, lengths, the whole works that proved you wrong. There is no large performance gap between .308 and .30-06 with heavy bullets. It's a very small gap. Just so it is crystal clear to everyone, here are the fastest possible SAAMI loads for a 220gr. Woodleigh loaded in .308 and .30-06 within SAAMI specs:

Held constant
-------------------------
Barrel length: 24"
Bullet: Woodleigh catalog # 65C - 220 grain round nose soft nose
Bullet length: 1.275" (per catalog)
Maximum loading ratio 105% (stick powders), 100% (ball powders)

Specific to .308
-------------------------
Max pressure (MAP): 62KPSI (per SAAMI - http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/publications/download/206.pdf )
OAL: 2.810" (max per SAAMI cartridge diagram - same pdf)
Case geometry and H2O capacity per QuickLoad

Specific to .30-06
-------------------------
Max pressure (MAP): 60KPSI (per SAAMI)
OAL: 3.340" (max per SAAMI)
Case geometry and H2O capacity per QuickLoad

Now, if we run every US-available powder against those specifications to find the fastest, here's what we get - top 2 powders for each:

.308
-------------------------
46.9 grains of Alliant RL-17 for a muzzle velocity of 2541 ft/s and a MAP of 62KPSI
46.2 grains of Vihtavuori N550 for a muzzle velocity of 2494 ft/s and a MAP of 62KPSI

.30-06
-------------------------
61.9 grains of Alliant RL-26 for a muzzle velocity of 2694 ft/s and a MAP of 60KPSI
59.5 grains of IMR 7828 SSC for a muzzle velocity of 2649 ft/s and a MAP of 60KPSI

As always, start down 5-10%, work up, use a chrono, and don't exceed the listed velocity even if you don't see pressure signs.

There is nothing "fake" about this data. These are the facts. The difference is small - 153 ft/s. It's worth noting that per the Woodleigh catalog, the recommended impact velocity range for the #65C bullet is 2000-2400 ft/s. So in fact both cartridges are capable of driving it faster than is recommended. Thus in practice there is literally NO difference between the two as you would be wise to download either to 2400 ft/s.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you're getting at. The data you present shows a 150 feet per second advantage to the 06, but you claim there is no improvement over the .308? So 150 is nothing?
 
jim in Anchorage said:
Not sure what you're getting at. The data you present shows a 150 feet per second advantage to the 06, but you claim there is no improvement over the .308? So 150 is nothing?
Click to expand...

I've said in every single post on this topic that it's 50-150 ft/s depending on the specifics of the bullet and load. Now, if that's what you're getting excited about, great. Go for it. Don't let me hinder you in any way. However, since both cartridges offer velocities above the top of the bullet's operating window per the manufacturer, it seems to me you're not even going to want to make much use of that 150 ft/s. You'd be well served to just load both to 2400 ft/s and be done with it. In other words, either cartridge is exactly as good as the other for this application. The bear can't read the case headstamp. If you think the .30-06 is a good bear gun with that bullet, you have to admit the .308 is just as good.
 
Llama Bob said:
You're blathering. I provided loads, with pressures, powdered, lengths, the whole works that proved you wrong. There is no large performance gap between .308 and .30-06 with heavy bullets.
Click to expand...

Nobody said the performance gap is large....but is not trivial either as you think it is....
We posted actual loads too....
 
FWIW, I was talking to a client today who while on safari in Namibia, shot a hippo with a .45-70. He said due to the tough skin the bullet only penetrated a few inches, it took 19 shots, including one from a .338, to kill it.
 
Paul7 said:
FWIW, I was talking to a client today who while on safari in Namibia, shot a hippo with a .45-70. He said due to the tough skin the bullet only penetrated a few inches, it took 19 shots, including one from a .338, to kill it.
Click to expand...
He was using the wrong bullet.
 
For anyone more interested in the Fabulous 45-70, I just picked up Venturino's "Shooting Buffalo Guns of the Old West". Great read so far.
 
Paul7 said:
Either that or the wrong caliber.
Click to expand...

Wrong bullet and/or velocity. The punch or northfork solids at 400+ grains most definitely work for thick skinned game. I know two people who've shot elephant, hippo and cape buffalo with them and penetration was as-desired.

What load was he using?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
America Buffalo Cartridges...onyl the 45-70 has been modernized?? Why???
2 3 4 5
Replies
102
Views
7K
saturno_v
S
R
  • Locked
  • Poll
Which 45/70 for Hunting?
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Cthulhu
C
JeffDilla
  • Locked
45/70 Options Other Than Marlin?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
JeffDilla
JeffDilla
C
  • Locked
? about .45-70 combat effectiveness
Replies
5
Views
2K
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
Homemade 45-50, anybody?
Replies
20
Views
1K
748
748
Back
Top