I've been looking at these.
I don't really dislike the feed mechanism.
I'm not too keen on the 14" LOP, buy that can be fixed.
I've read that heavy loads may be too much, but, I think I'll stick to cast sub 2k fpß loads anyway.

You don't need to run the 45-70 at 40,000 cups to be effective. 350-385 grain bullets running 1500-1700 work just fine within a moderate distance.

I've gotten more than enough performance out of the .45-70 at 35 Kpsi or less.

28 Kpsi, with the right powder and a 425 or so grain LBT, is suitable for anything the .45-70 is.

The velocity window Klik gave is working good for me with bullet weights from 300 grain to 435 grains. I've ran some 540 grain LBT-types at just over 1500 fps and the penetration is tremendous.

For hunting deer around here, I use a 300 grain bullet at 1700 fps, damage is not excessive by any means and the terminal performance is quite sufficient.

If you buy one, make sure it has a semi-buckhorn rear site and not an aperture site. When Henry first came out with their .45-70 the retaining ring on the end of the magazine tube was too flimsy (it was just like the ones on their other rimfire and center fire rifles). The recoil of the .45-70 would cause the pin in the rod that fits inside the tube to damage that ring.

I had to send mine back to Henry and when it came back they reinforced that ring so that's not a problem, but for some reason they replaced the rear site, and all the new ones have the semi-buckhorns now.

It might surprise you how well a 405 grain hard cast flat point traveling 1300 - 1400 fps will penetrate. Easy on the ears, the shoulder, and the wallet.

undecided ?

lots of Marlins to pick from....

simple & easy action to maintain/clean

McInnis, I am of the opposite opinion you have in regards to sights.

I'd much rather have an aperature sight instead of a semi-buckhorn. Or, is there a particular weakness in the Henry OEM aperature?

McInnis, I am of the opposite opinion you have in regards to sights.

I'd much rather have an aperature sight instead of a semi-buckhorn. Or, is there a particular weakness in the Henry OEM aperature?


I did not say I prefer the semi-buckhorn site. But, when Henry modified the reinforcement of the magazine tube, they replaced the aperture site with the buckhorn. I don't know why, as replacement of the sites has nothing to do with the flaw in the magazine, but it's what they did.

So what I'm telling everyone is that if they find a Henry 45-70 with an aperture site, it's of the old design and they'll have to send it back to the factory for modification.

OK, now I understand. A good thing to know. Now that I comprehend...

So, you will still have to put the aperture sight on it as an aftermarket item.

The Henry 45/70 does not have a loading gate on the side of the receiver. While the inner tube loading magazine (like a 22LR) is less likely to shear off than a conventional tube magazine, I like booth means of loading a magazine like the Rossi 454 Casull. Since I use my 454 Casull for polar bear protection around Hudson Bay, the loading gate allows loading without firing the last round in case things go "Western".

On these new Henrys can you remove the bolt and clean from the breech and not the muzzle?

When I bought my Henry I got the one with the buckhorn rear sight.
But guess what my magazine tube was messed up after about 50rnds.
I almost need vicegrips to get the brass rod out.
I sent it back to Henry and they fixed it. They all so put a new forearm on for me after I kinda puckered it up installing a marble full buckhorn rear sight, at no charge.

I was in the same dilemma but I just don't like the feeding tube option. My other concern and maybe someone can answer here, but are their difference in strength between Henry and marlin?