Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa What about the 45/70 in Africa

Goodnews: It bothered me as well, but I think it serves the purpose to differentiate between "adequate" and the right choice.

rattler: I'm not in complee agreement with your statement. For one thing the 375's sectional density and 2500 plus MV far outclass the 45/70 with a low SD 350-400gr bullet or a slow moving 500grain bullet. Slow velocity in the 458 Win Mag was what gave taht caliber a bad rep until the advent of modern powders enable it to break the 2100 fps barrier. I think we're approaching "dead horse" status with this thread in that we are all in agreement a 45/70 can and has taken buffalo and even elephant, but just like taking one with a 3006, it can be done but it's just not right and prudent. jorge

it is my understanding squib loads were more of a problem than the loads not quite making factory specs with the 458 along with crappy bullets. ive never messed with a 458 but ive yet to see a 405 grainer out of my 45-70 do anything but plow straight through what ever its pointed at. i agree velocity can be a beautiful thing but if you guys are in agreement that the 45-70 with Garrett type loads arent good medicine for hunting buffs i have a hard time believing the 375 H&H is a good choice as well......

Oh! how civil!!


I've also seen some pictures of you and by them I'd say you're one of the bravest men in the world...riding that skank must take some doing!

God I was trying to just let this die but one more time...

Jorge, I'm sure you realize that sectional density is independent of velocity adn that's just a minor grammatical error in your post. The 535 gr .458 bullet that I used when last in Africa has a sectional density of 0.364. A legal and thus, acceptable (to you guys) 286 gr Barnes Triple Shock bullet has a sectional density of .305, giving a 20% edge to the .45-70 bullet over the 9.3. (I chose this particular bullet and load because it is the subject of a current thread on AR and no one has jumped his bones for being an idiot to consider such for cape buffalo). No one here or anywhere is arguing for tiny little Express weight bullets - there is a good reason that express cartridges died a quick death - see we can all agree on SOMETHING - let's talk about AMERICAN (if you will) bullet weights and for guys like me and Sharpsguy, these start around 500 (my apologies to John Rigby and his .45 cal 550 gr muzzleloading bullets). And remember we are taling about reasonably, or minimally adequate cartridges, not "the best" by your personal standards.

Of course, the 9.3 has more energy, and the argument of the importance of energy has yet to be settled, but some qualified folks around here seem to think energy is a worthless measure of anything - I would not go quite that far, but energy ain't everything.

JPK, I'm sorry that I have ruffled your feathers to such a degree. I find the anti 45-70 crowd and the condecending attitudes they project to be humorous more than anything else. But be that as it may, you really have no experience shooting big game with slow lead bullets - just like I have no experience hunting cape buffalo. So where to from here?

Well, let's consider that cape buffalo really are not that big. They ain't small, but they are not huge either. American bison are bigger. (quick edit - a little research here suggests that a big cape buffalo is about 1500 lbs, while a big American Bison is 2000 or even 2500 lbs. Note that an eland is often going to run 2,000 lbs). So keep in mind that bison are about a third bigger or more than cape buffalo. Of course, American bison don't have the vaunted "overlapping" ribs, but in the end, a .45-70 has killed quite literally 10s of MILLIONS of bison, hitting many of them square on a rib or a shoulder or both and yet they still passed through. And they did this at ranges that were generally many multiples of the ranges that cape buffalo are shot at. Do you REALLY believe that a bullet that will pass through both shoulders of a 2000 lb bison will fail to reach the vitals of a cape buffalo? I don't think you would care to argue that point, but who am I to guess what you might think? So, at the sub50 yds ranges at which cape buffs seem to be most often shot, I think the .45-70 could be quite adequate.

Next, let's consider the "charge". I have noticed that the well known Saeed of Accurate Reloading has claimed to have shot an excessive number of buffalo and never had a charge - so we have to consider that this is prepping for a very small percentage situation. But be that as it may, Saeed has also stated several times that he would be quite happy to hunt a cape buffalo with a .45-70. Strangely, NO ONE ever lays into Saeed about those statements, but they do for the unknowns like Sharpsguy etc. So, apparently, there is one expert (and can we agree that Saeed qualifies as an "expert"?) who thinks the .45-70 is adequate for him.

But I have side-tracked myself. Back to that very rare charge. Recently, someone posted a link to a U-Tube video of the infamous (note, I did NOT say famous) Mark Sullivan and his many charging critters. Now, I don't much care for his videos, but I have to say, that man can shoot, and one thing he does repeatedly, is shoot charging animals in the head. From everything I have heard here and elsewhere, all DG hunters worth their salt (ie, folks like you and jorge and allen), all claim that the head shot at VERY close range is the shot to make. That being the case, do you really think that a 535 gr lead bullet at 1250 fps (1867 ftlbs) is going to fail to take out the brainstem of a cape buffalo at 20 ft? Or bust a neck vertebra on a side shot? Of course not!

So, I'm sure that Sullivan likes his 700 NE because it looks good, impresses the girls etc. But frankly, given the way that guy shoots and the way he stays in the hole when the [bleep] comes down, I'd be happy to let him back me up with a .38-55 (all other Sullivan-baggage withstanding).

I'll throw another "fact" out for you. Sharpsguy is just one of many folks that have not been able to recover a bullet in an animal shot with a slow .45. Note that he was shooting some of them from in excess of 300 yds. This is common experience for many, even most shooters of slow lead bullets. And by slow, I mean in the sub1500 fps range. To date, I have recovered only 2 bullets from game I have shot with the .45. Two in god-only knows how many (and there from loads with a 1186 fps muzzle velocity - something that a smokeload can easily and dramatically exceed).

Jim, I believe you have personally told me of cape buffalo shot end for end with .44 mags. If so, they are no match for a .45-70. Perhaps I disremember. But I never seen folks here or on AR so fast to jump on a handgun hunter as they are quick to jump on a .45-70 hunter. Why? Seems irrational to me.

Anyway, tear away at any of this and I'll go back to doing something productive and hopefully leave this thread to die a long slow death...

Brent

PS. I'd MUCH rather discuss the lever vs bolt-action issue. Much more interesting, and I own neither (one .22 rf excepted)...

Yes Brent I knew there is no correlation, and the bullet you nmention does have great SD, but at what velocity are you launching it? If it's below 2100, I don't consider that enough, but that's just my opinion.

Terrence, what on EARTH are you talking about now moron? Please don't tell me the word "skank" means what I think you mean? Sure you've seen my pictures, so has everybody else,
And just for the folks here's one of Terrence, he's the one hiding something under his shirt on the far right:


jorge

I have not chimed in on this subject as I really dont care to get into this pissing contest.
The most important part of buffalo hunting is to get the "properly constructed" bullet into the "correct vital area". It may sound simple and it may be. But things do go wrong. Maybe you are excited, maybe you jerked a little on the shot whatever the case the cape buffalo does not allow any room for error. I am sorry but it does not. The worse case is you put others in harms way on the follow up. The least is you spent the trophy fee.
I think the person that uses the 45/70 with proper bullets and truly enjoys hunting with this firearm type will have no problems if they prepare properly.
The average guy will be better served with a more conventional rifle and DG cartridge. The average guy will not shoot the hard kicking Guide Gun for example with heavily loaded cartridges as he would with a 11 pound 375 or 458.
Unless you are a died in the wool 45/70 person you wil be better served with a more conventional bolt action rifle with a stock design that will assist in the recoil.
Get a gun that you do not mind practicing with. Some of the 45/70 guns that are being used will punish you compared to a bolt rifle. Don't kid yourself. You know what you can handle.
Also please pay attention to shot placement on the buffalo. It is the most important part. I think too many hunters from the states shoot too far behind the shoulder. Get the shot tight into the shoulder. Dont mess around with this.
A better discussion may be between the single shot 45/70 compared to the lever action. For me some of the singles shots are more manageable than the lever guns.
Even then I would probably go with my 9.3x74 or 458 WM Ruger #1 first (although they will probably never make the trip). For me I just get caught up in the magic of using conventional african calibers for the big stuff in Africa.
For me I cannot see shooting a Bison in the states with a 270. It will work but I would have to use a "proper cartridge" .

jorge, this weekend I was launching 550s at 1333 fps for 1000 yds shooting. In a hunting load, I would launch them at about the same or a bit more if using smokeless in a .45-70 (say sub1500 though more is possible I'm sure). Using a .45-70 with bp as I would prefer, I would launch at 1250 or so.

I realize you consider them inadquate. I don't. I have killed things bigger than cape buffalo (eland) with slower loads. I would hunt cape buffalo with a 1250/535 load in a New York minute if I could afford it.

Brent

ok, Brent, thanks. I'm sure it would work but on a minor point, eland ain't buffalo, even if they often-times weigh more. The skeletal/muscle structure isn't even close. jorge

PS: Gentlemen what do you all think Moccassin Joe means when he mentions the word skank?

I just wanted to get this whole post on the record folks, I apologize. jorge

more mental masterbation but Jorge and company whats your opinions on the Ruger #1 in 450/400? or even the round itself?

BTW Brent i would love hunting Africa with a Sharps, however ive got an itch for a 50......as much as i love the 45-70

The word skank, as defined by The Free Online Dictionary by Farlex is:
1. A rhythmic dance performed to reggae or ska music, characterized by bending forward, raising the knees,and extending the hands.

2. Disgusting or vulgar matter; filth.

3. One who is disgustingly foul or filthy, and ofter considered sexually promiscuous. Used especially of a woman or girl.

I know Mike thanks, I just want to hear it from him.. if he has the guts. jorge

BrentD,

You are mixing and matching disparate tidbits of fact to try to coble together an arguement for the 45/70. Yes your heavy bullets have sectional density. Yes the 286gr 9.3's are relatively lighter, so too are the 300gr 375's, both with sectional densities around .305. What makes the latter suitable for cape buffalo and and the former unsuitable is the energy each cartridge delivers per unit of the bullets' frontal area. For the 458wm, for maximum penetration, I prefer 450gr flat nose solids, but they are running 2190fps. The 458wm's 500gr bullets have a sectional density of .341 and it still takes 2050fps or so to make them reliable for DG.

Jorge, who has killed both buff and eland notes that they are not comparable and he is right. Likewise a bison and a cape bullalo. Again Jorge notes that a 45/70 will kill a buff, he's right for sure. What it won't due is reliably send the bullet into the vitals from some of the angles that shots, if not the first, are likely to be taken. Add to that the question of bullet integrity to boot. As I've said, flat point bullets enhance penetration, but not, IMO, enough to make up for the lack of velocity, or energy per unit of bullet frontal area. And the bullet needs to stay intact.

As far as penetration on a frontal brain shot on a buff, I wouldn't be too confident that the bullet will make it reliably. 500 Grains brained a buff with a 570gr Woodleigh bonded core soft point that left the rifle at 2150. This is an expanding bullet, but it is a premium bonded bullet with the lead core bonded to the copper jacket. The bullet did the job, but barely. The bullet was still in the skull and was hardly recognizable. Miss high, which would lead to a spine shot, and you have the boss to contend with. I do not believe that a lead bullet of any description could penetrate a bull's boss.

Even so, tough tests come from other directions too. A quartering on shot that exposes the onside should or even the frontal shot where the bullet must overcome a thick, energy absorbing skin and scar tissue and fibrous mass to enter the vitals. Your second shot is likely to be a hard quartering away or even straight away shot. That shot should be able to penetrate into the vitals through the length or nearly the length of the bull. Next opportunity you have, try shooting something big, like a bison or moose that you have killed, from the front and then the rear and dig for your bullets.

My books are packed away in preperation for moving or I could cite a variety of examples, but not every 450 Express shot light for calibre bullets. Some were regulated for heavier bullets, like 440grs and more. Velocities were below 2000fps but not by much. Bullets were hardened to try to make the rifles perform. The efforts by the 19th century hunters did not work, the rifles remained unreliable for use on DG in Africa. Nothing new has changed what works and what doesn't, with the exception of flat nose bullets which do enhance penetration - but not enough to alter the results, IMO. A 577 Express was considered a light rifle for buff. 650 grains of hardened lead bullet and more, an entirely different league of rifle and still light for buff. An 8 bore rifles was considered good buff medicine. I think the hardened bullet weights were in the two ounce range, velocity about 1800fps - but I'd need to reread to be sure and my books are packed.

Saeed has not been charged by a buff. His good fortune. Bob Fontana was killed by a charging buff, not good fortune. Nicki Atcheson was gored by a charging buff, likewise. PH Rich Tabor, who I have hunted with, was charged twice last year by buff - and three times by elephants that were not bluffing and ended with the elephants being killed - tough year. Likely nothing will happen when you hunt buff, but why bet that your number won't come up the first time you see a buff? Better be prepared, as Allan Day suggest.

JPK

Ruraldoc,

IMO, your rifle would be fine for buff, shooting solids or a really good soft for the first shot and then solids. But it is not legal. The smallest bore that is legal is, to the best of my knowledge, .366 or 9.3.

I have never shot a lion, though I have hunted them twice. Allen Day, who posts here has killed at least one lion. I believe he used a 416 Remington. Since I have no personal experience shooting lions, I do not believe that I am qualified to answer your question. But, since that sure doesn't seem to stop others from hypothicizing, I'll take a crack and say that I think it would be fine - but like on buff, marginal.

BTW, Allen Day also shot a buff with a 300wm after his 458wm went tits up. IIRC, he wrote that it worked, but that all of the planets had to be in line and that he wouldn't do it again. He posts here. You might ask him his opinion of your rifle on lions.

JPK

JPK,

Thank you for your answer, I had incorectly assumed you were in Africa because of the information you posted earlier.

Britt

JPK: That was one of the best, well-reasoned and sensible discussions on the subject I've read in a long time and precisely the type of post that makes forums like these so valuable.

AS to the other query regarding the 450/400 and single shot rifles, all I know is that bullet delivers a 400gr bullet2150 fps or so, the equivalent of the 404 Jeffreys. It has killed many, many head of game in Africa including the big five, but I prefer the 416s. As to the single shot rifle, again it can be done and it HAS been done, but Craig Boddington in one of his books says he tried it once and won't do so again due to the slow reloading time, even though on his TV show it was used by others to take buffalo; with TWO other rifles as backup. Personally, if I had no other choices I'd do it, but I would pick my shots very carefully ensuring a safe avenue of escape and or good backup. jorge

JPK, actually, I killed two Cape buffalo with my 300 Win. Mag. on that safari. Both were big, mature bulls - one 42" and the other 43 + ". I used 180 gr. Winchester Fail-Safe factory loads that clocked 3050 fps. out of my rifle.

Both of these buffalo are depicted in Mark Sullivan's book, "Death and Double Rifles" on pages 92 & 194, with the blurb story about me killing them with a 300 Winchester on page 194, and the taking of the 42" bull is shown in Sullivan's DVD, "Sudden Death". It's probably the only commercial video footage of a Cape buffalo being taken with a 300 Winchester that's in existence. Both of these bulls were about 100 yds. out when I shot them off-hand, and both went down instantly to spine shots.

And you're right, everything's got to be just right to pull such stunt shooting off, and NO, I'll NEVER try this sort of thing ever again..............

AD

The interesting thing about the 45-70 debate is that the great majority of 45-70 advocates have not actually used it to hunt elephant or cape buffalo, while the great majority of people who have actually been there and hunted those animals do not advocate use of a 45-70.

Dan,
The interesting thing to me is that those that are so adamently against letting ANYBODY do it, have never shot anything with a slow .45 and a heavy bullet.

Pay the bill and I'll gladly shoot a buffalo with a .45-70. Unfortunatly, I did not win the last lottery and we know what happened to the person that did.

If you guys really do not think a .45-70 will penetrate a cape buffalo, you are missing out, and there is ample evidence that has been posted showing that not only can it be done, it HAS been done. Still, the antis continue to protest and yet have never actually shot anything with one yet.

Brent

PS. Interestingly a post on AR this morning shows three bullet from a 9.3 that did not exit a buffalo - two of them were solids and they still didn't make it out. I'd prefer the .45-70 thanks.

Brent: I thought one of my posts a few back was particularly specific and it's yet to be addressed; specifically, WHY in it's 100 plus year history has the 45/70 not been used in africa even with the advent of new powders and bullets? NOBODY, PHs, residents, etc., uses the damned thing except for a few aficionados. If it worked and given it's low cost you would think PHs, always looking to cut costs would have jumped at that opportunity. And why haven't they? because it just doesn't cut it, not reliably anyway. It's purely a stunt, yes just like hunting buffalo with a handgun, bow or like in the video spears. So if anybody wants to play "Quigley Down Under" no problem with me, but remember, there are minimum caliber/energy laws that apply.

I don't own a 9.3 so I don't know why you keep bringing it up, but I'd choose it over the 45/70 any day even though I consider it marginal but a lot less than a 45/70. And as for lever actions, they are extremely succeptible to failure in extreme conditions. So much so, that apart from wasting bullets, the Army never adopted it because of reliability problems, exactly the same issues as DG hunting. Reliability on both consistentcy AND penetration. jorge