Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Little big horn / greasy grass battle

The military has a standard by which they choose weapons, tactics, armor and all sorts of things as they prepare for battle. That was true then, as it is today.

During the Indian Wars, the army tested firearms in regards to how well they would perform with the least amount of breakdowns or failures. They did have an acceptable rate that would still allow a less than perfect firearm become the issued weapon.

The idea of fighting plains Indians was built around fighting in a skirmish line of troopers several feet apart and firing in a battery with sustained fire of 8-10 rounds per minute and as every trooper would be firing in a separate cycle, the skirmish line became a force to be effective against Indian attacks.

The 45-70 was also a longer range rifle than a Winchester 1866 or Henry repeater. Once a repeating rifle is empty, it takes enough time to reload, that the person using that rifle is out of the fight for a sustained amount of time as everyone else is firing their guns empty. Consider the range and energy of the 45-70 and it becomes vastly superior in its lethality because a 45-70 can also put down a horse.

Comanche was Miles Keogh’s horse and sustained 7-10 small arms wounds and survived the battle. He would never have survived that many 45-70 wounds. If you can put an Indian’s horse down, you can take an Indian out of the fight.

So when you see where people comment about Custer being outgunned by the Indians with repeating rifles, you can tell how much they don’t know about the decisions made by the army in regards to how they equipped their cavalry.

Custer wasn’t outgunned, he was out numbered and beaten by superior tactics in a setting that can’t be calculated in a board room somewhere that will see every condition that could be met in the field.