With apologies to mikeh416Rigby for having inadvertently hijacked his thread.....
When I started working up loads for my .458 Winchester Magnum,several campfire members advised that I try using Remington 405 grain flatpoints for practice.These bullets tend to fly usefully close to 450 and 500 grain .458 bullets out to 100 yds to be effective and inexpensive substitutes for that purpose.They also tend to be amazingly accurate in many .458 rifles.
This particular projectile was actually developed for the 45/70,and campfire members have used them to effectively dispatch animals as big and hardy as Elk and American Bison.Periodically they can be bought from Midway,and I assume others,in bulk for 18 1/2 cents apiece.Over the course of firing hundreds of rounds,that could add up to considerable savings compared to the various "premium" bullets so enthusiastically endorsed by so many.
In a rather extensive article in the most recent (August 2007) Handloader magazine,Brian Pearce discusses his use of this and similar bullets and he found them to work quite well against several species of large game in both North America and Africa,including cape buffalo.
It seems to me that the 45/70 with 405 gr bullets and the ubiquitous 1895 Marlin lever action chambered in 45/70 have been completely ignored on the campfire when this kind of hunting is discussed.Many campfire members apparently already have these rifles.The projectiles ,in many cases,are drastically less expensive than those most promoted,denegrated,and/or compared by posters on the campfire.
I was wondering why this is so,other than convention,conceit,or aesthetics of the correspondents involved.It occurs to me that their reasoning might be very instructive,and hopefully might provoke some entertaining conversation and enlightenment.
Again,this is essentially a three part question:
1)Is the 1895 Marlin and it's ilk a viable weapon for dangerous/big game hunting?Why or why not?
2) Is the 45/70 a viable cartridge for dangerous game hunting ? Why or why not?
3) Are projectiles like the Remington Softnose Flatpoint and Corbon Solid Flatpoint 405 gr. bullets viable for these purposes in the 45/70 or .458 Winchester etc.Why or why not?
It should also be noted that Mr. Pearce has stated flatly that driving these bullets to 2000 or perhaps a bit higher fps range is both easilly and safely accomplished.

Steve I think you are on to something. Before I purchased my .416, I was going through the safe with an acquaintance of mine who has killed a lot of buff. He was looking at my 1895 .405 and said "you know you could use this for buffalo". He also said it would be a minimal cartridge for the job. I believe Larry Porterfield (sp?) who owns Midway has taken buff with an 1895 .405. Ballisticly, these loads are very close to the 450/400, which no one questions.

I have not killed a buffalo and am certainly not any kind of expert. However, I do know it has been done and I do think Aussiegunwriter's comment on another thread regarding fashion statements has some validity. This being said, I have chosen a .416 for my upcoming hunt, mostly because I wanted one.

You did the right thing in getting a 416 Rigby/Rem (?) for your buffalo hunt, and don't even consider a 45-70. You are hunting something that can kill you, why use a popgun? The 45-70 isn't up to the task, and its proponents are irresponsible, IMO.

I guess that's pretty much my point.Once I committed to this buff hunt I started looking for the same rifle I have now in .458 Win.,but what I really wanted was a .416 Rigby.The one I wound up with was the only one available locally,and the deal was just too good to pass up.
They both fill that "Romance" quotient,both being classic African cartridges housed in a classic DGR. ......But I did already have those two 45/70s just sitting in the safe.....and frankly,nothing I read here indicated that those would do.I'm not saying I wouldn't have taken this route anyway,and certainly I knew enough to make the decision myself.Nevertheless,the "culture" as it were,of hunters of exotic big game does tend to steer us in a certain direction.

Read the article.There are four levels of loading data for the 45/70....18K psi (basically factory and black powder loading),23K psi,35-38k,and 52K.....the last for sure is hardly a popgun.

the thing that makes me most leery of using the Marlin on dangerous game is not the power level of a warm loaded 45-70 but the fact that Aussiegunwriter(i believe, sorry if im confused) stated that he has had firing pins bust with no warning on a couple(several?). after seeing the kinda penetration that even light loaded 405 grainers out of the 45-70 can accomplish.......i would say the Buffalo Bore and Garrett type loads should work fine on buff's, if you can shoot them well in those light guide guns.....

People will say that any push feed bolt action rifle is not suitable for dangerous game, because it cannot be reliably fed from any angle from vertical. But a Marlin lever action rifle cannot either, not even close.

Steve--The 45-70 will work just fine on anything over there, if you use the right load and bullet. The 405 grain bullets are too light to deliver the kind of penetration the 45-70 is capable of. You need a bullet of 500 to 540 grains and a velocity of 1550 fps or a bit less to achieve maximum penetration.

Check out Randy Garrett's website to find out why.

Now. I just returned from South Africa in mid April, hunting plains game with African Bushveld Safaris. I took seven good animals. Two kudu, a black wildebeast, a blue wildebeast, a gemsbok, a springbok, and an impala. I used a Shiloh Sharps 45-110 with traditional cast lead bullets and Goex black powder pushing 511 and 527 grain bullets from 1367 to 1380 fps.

One kudu was taken at 302 yards and knocked off his feet, the blue wildebeast was knocked down at 312 yards, and the springbok was put down at 325 yards. The gemsbok went straight down at the shot. ALL the shots fired gave complete pass through, and the Sharps broke both of the the black wildebeasts' shoulders from 225 yards and exited. A finishing shot inboard of his left ham exited his chest, passing through him lengthwise in the process. The Sharps and its black powder load shot through something over 60 inches of black wildebeast.

These bullets all had round noses, were cast at 30-1, and driven by Goex 2f black powder. NOT A SINGLE BULLET WAS RECOVERED FROM ANY ANIMAL. These velocities are easily reached by a 45-70 using smokeless powder. The key is to use a bullet that weighs 500 grains or better. There are bullet designs that have a long base and a short nose in this weight range that will cycle through your lever gun. The 405 grain bullets will not give this kind of penetration.

My two professional hunters were impressed to the extent that they want to see this rifle and load work on Cape Buffalo, as they are absolutely convinced that it will do the job. I have booked a hunt with two of my friends for May of 2008. The rifle has already shot all the way through an American Bison, knocking him off his feet. I think I can get all the way through the shoulders on a Cape Buffalo as well. Come May, I plan to find out. For what it's worth, I have all of this on DVD. Hope this helps.

I don't doubt anything you've said about your experience with these heavier cast bullets.Yet there is evidence out there that those 405s have in fact done a pretty good job of penetrating quite well.To whit:Brian Pearce having shot completely through a cape buff at the shoulders,and then having the pass through continue on to go through a cape buff cow on the other side,with the bullet winding up under the hide on the off side.Another 405 having gone almost completely through the bull almost full length from rear to front.These were both Cor-Bon 405 PEN solid bullets @ 1800 fps out of an 1895 Marlin.
I hope MoccasinJoe1 pipes in.He put one of the Remington 405 soft point flat points through both shoulders of a North American Bison,I believe also @1800 fps.He used a Harrington and Richardson Buffalo Classic I believe,which is essentially a single shot similar to the NEF Partner type guns.
I don't doubt that the longer heavier bullets will probably penetrate even better,it just seems that these 405 gr. flatpoints shouldn't be dismissed quite so easilly.

Why does this 45-70 stuff keep coming up. A 45-70 simply isn't as good for buffalo or other dangerous game as a real cartridge designed for African game. See the link for proof.

http://www.470mbogo.com/PenetrationComparison.html

Did anyone read the article about Olsa Johnson and How she droped a couple of Cape Buffalo with an 1895 Winchester in 405 and turned The charging herd and saved her husband as he filmed the action out front.She shot many Cape as well as other species of game to feed the large photographic Safaria crew.... She didn't have or use a so called adequate DGR and she never seemed to have a problem.......I guess she could hit fairly well... Ross Seyfried had no trouble taking a Cape with a heavy loaded 45 Colt... I asked him about it just yesterday and he stated that it worked just fine...........

This is a perfect answer to a different question.I doubt anyone seriuosly thinks that the 45/70 is more powerful than the traditional African cartridges we are talking about.
The question is,is the 45/70 powerful enough ? Can the 405 gr. flatpoint bullets in a 45/70 (at maximum pressures ie loaded at 52,000 psi,not 1873 Springfield pressures)do the job consistently on animals like Cape Buff ? Can a firearm like the 1895 Marlin be safely and reliably be used to do this ? Not just opinion based on hearsay or "it seems logical" but on verifiable fact?
No one here doubts that a .300 Winchester Mag will throw a given 180 gr. bullet faster than a .308 winchester will.If the bullet is up to the velocity,it will penetrate better from the .300 Mag than it will from the .308 .But ,out to 200 yds. at least , on deer,is it necessary? The old question still arises,how dead is dead ?
Obviously there are inherent dangers in facing dangerous game.The question is,will the cartridges and bullets in question get the job done ? If penetration is really what kills,as opposed to energy,and these combos will infact penetrate one of these animals completely,then what else is needed ?Obviously the 45/70 with 405 gr. bullets can be made to deliver more energy than some of the "accepted" African cartridges,the 9.3 x62,64,72,74 all come immediately to mind,the 450/400 might well be another (in it's traditional loadings).The evidence seems to show that the penetration is there.There are dozens ,if not hundreds of members of this board who can attest that the accuracy is there in spades.Ditto for the strength and reliability of the firearm itself,assuming it is well maintained,and the loads have been crafted and tested with due diligence.
I find it hard to believe any serious person here would question the strength of the reworked Siamese Mauser for these purposes.The same caveats to make sure that any other cartridge in a Mauser action will feed properly would apply to these loads in a Siames Mauser.I know I have personally driven 405 gr. bullets from my Siamese Mauser well into the 1900-2000 fps category,with no discernable pressure signs.I did this perhaps 30 years ago,there are better powders available now.I have not ever used these combos on game.

If you look at SD, it becomes apparent that the .405 gr .45-70 bullet at about .27 is quite a bit lower than the preferred .300 (or 500 gr) level for the big nasty critters. The smaller diameter bullets you mention make the .3 SD too. The reason to consider it is solid bullets with that SD can be counted on to penetrate in a straight line.

People have shot and killed Cape buff with the .45-70, but I don't think any of the devotees consider it to be proper for all situations. I remember the feeling after shooting a .375"/300 gr Swift A-Frame from my .375 H&H behind the shoulder of a big bull, and seeing no reaction. This animal did die, but it took a while.

Also folks should read Ross' Handloader article (I think he titled it Theory of Relativity) on shooting buff with heavy lead revolver bullets. There is definitely more to that story.

jim

Steve1--

Personally, I don't understand the point here and please don't read that as a criticsm. And I'll also add I've never killed a buff but hope to some day. The 45-70 has killed buff and no doubt will again as have many lesser cartridges including the 45 colt mentioned. But why try? At some point it falls into the realm of being a gimmick.

American buff, yes, but cape buff, no. For me anyway. When you have an animal that not only has the size and toughness they do but in addition has the temperament of vindictiveness when hurt, that when things don't go well may come for you or wait for you and try to kill you why would you not spring for the armament conventional wisdom says is appropriate for the worst scene scenario?

You are spending ~ 6 to 10k to get over there to hunt one and there are any number of appropriate rifle-scope combo's for under 1k especially if you are a right-hander which you probably are. Scrimping here seems to me to be "penny wise, pound foolish". It is not a matter of "can it do it" (the 45-70). We know it can but is it wise?

And I love my Guide gun in 45-70.

Gdv

The only thing missing from that video was a 1895 Marlin with a few Hammerheads for an actual "VS" comparison.... (missed an opportunity to put all this so called BS to bed)...........
Tom

Osa Johnson with Rhino
Thomas Bland double rifle in .470 Nitro Express

Martin and Osa Johnson had three Thomas Bland .470 NE double rifles in their rifle battery during their stay at Lake Paradise in the 1920s. (Plus other rifles, including three Model 1895 Winchesters in .405 Winchester, two bolt action rifles in .404 Jeffery, and one in .505 Gibbs.)
Source: I Married Adventure by Osa Johnson, Copyright 1940.

The Martin and Osa Johnson Safari Museum web site:
http://www.safarimuseum.com/

-Bob F.

BFaucett, you know where to find all of the good write ups at a moments notice..........

jwp475,

Thanks! I try to help out when I can. Here's a photo just for you:



Osa Johnson with Winchester Model 1895 in .405 Winchester

Cheers!
-Bob F.

T Pearce--There is a good chance they did try the 1895 Marlin in 45-70 and some 540 grain Garrett Hammerheads. If so, that is probably why you don't see them in that particular video. I frankly would like to see a public head to head comparison to clear the air one way or the other. It has already been demonstrated that the 45-70 Garrett loadings will deliver more penetration than a number of the commonly used DG loads and calibers. This is not really about which cartridge is the most powerful, rather it is about whether the right load in a 45-70 is safe and adequate. My take is if a 375 or a 416 is enough, there is no reason that the 45-70 loaded correctly should not be used.

All,
I think it was JB that did an Energy comparison of various calibers years ago using a dirt filled box on top a sawhorse.
The numbers on the charts VS target reaction was quite disappointing. IIRC, It took a super thumper just to knock some of the fill out of the thing.
Understanding that limits have to be set. How would you have set them?
Tom

The only way to set the limits would be to send me to Africa with my trusty .45-70 and let me shoot a buffalo. I'd do it in a heart beat with a black powder load too.

Sadly, I paid $100 for a lottery for just this purpose. More sadly, it never happened and I never saw my $100 again.

Sharpsguy, I sure would like a copy of that DVD.... Had a hoot shooting 1k this past weekend. I'd not want to be on the receiving end of one of those - even at that range, they pack a lot of punch....

Brent

The portion of this quote about penetration is just false.

JPK

JPK--I am unclear as to what portion of what quote you are referring to as false.

Brent D--I agree with you. I am not saying that a 45-70 is as powerful as the accepted African DG cartridges, but I fully believe that I can drive a 520 grain 16-1 or 20-1 cast 457125 bullet through the shoulders of a Cape Buffalo with 70 grains of Goex 3f Express black powder. I would really like to give it a try, and given the opportunity in May, I will do just that.

I'll get a copy of the DVD out to you tomorrow. Good shooting, BTW, and congratulations. That is a rough crowd to shoot with. Fewless was runner up at the nationals last year.

This part:
"It has already been demonstrated that the 45-70 Garrett loadings will deliver more penetration than a number of the commonly used DG loads and calibers."

This portion of your quote is false. Newsprint, wet or dry or any other way, does not correlate to penetration in any game. To believe otherwise is silly and could even be dangerous.

Also, while I believe that a 45/70 would kill cape buffalo most of the time with some shot angles, your opinion and mine are irrelavant since, I am fairly certain, the 45/70 is not a legal weapon in any country where wild cape buffalo are hunted. It is certainly illegal in Zimbabwe. The reason that it is illegal is that weapons of this calibre and velocity/energy have proven unreliable over time. The old British 450 Expresses, shooting hardened lead bullets, where not reliable and they were shooting at the top end of 45/70 performance.

I am a believer in flat point non expanding bullets. Still history shows that a (round nose) 500gr solid needs to be moving at greater than 2050fps for reliable adequate penetration on all african game. Take elephant out of the equation and you still need close to that velocity with a 500gr bullet to ensure penetration on all but broadside shots, imo. I don't think that a flat nose makes up for 550fps woth of difference between a 500gr round nose and a 500gr flat nose, or a 550 grain flat nose either. I also wonder about the twist rate for stabilizing a 550gr bullet in game. It has been shown that greater twist/stabilization improves penetration in game, though not with enough evidence to be conclusive.

Three things to think about:
1. Two similar bullets leave two rifles at different velocities and impact cape buff in "identical" shots. The fast one penetrates until it has slowed to the impact speed of the slow one; then it penetrates as far as the slow one.
2. Cape buffalo are not a homogenous substance. Any shot will encounter different material, including bone.
3. There is no bone in wet newsprint. Steel jacketed bullets and homogenous solids are harder and tougher than cast lead no matter how you alloy it. Even steel jacketed bullets and brass or copper solids can have a tough time of it when encountering bone.

But in the end, why use an underpowered rifle when there are many better alternatives. Those who look at a hot loaded 45/70 and say "Oh, but the energy levels are comparable with the, say, 450/400 or 9.3x62 or whatever," fail to recall that it is energy or momentum per frontal area of the bullet. This is why the light DG rifles, 375H&H, 9.3x62 shine and have been successful for generations and the 45/70 and the more powerful 450 Expresses are illegal, where left behind by history and are best left behind now.

JPK

JPK--When you use the term"imo", you are expressing your opinion. That is fine, and we are both entitled to do that. You might not like wet newspaper as a test medium, but the fact remains that it is/was a constant used in a test protocol and in that test, the 45-70 Hammerheads performed at a higher level of penetration than did the accepted DG cartridges that were tested. That is a test using a common widely used medium, and therefore the test can serve as a useful basis for comparison. That is my opinion, and is as valid as yours.

You have apparently never seen what a good cast bullet can do. I have shot completely through NINE inches of solid bone with a 514 grain paper patched bullet cast at 30-1 with my Sharps and black powder. That is not a hard bullet. I frankly don't see any problem getting through a Cape Buffalo, especially if the bullet is a bit harder, say 16-1 or 20-1.

I have shot through a black wildebeast from ham to brisket, the bullet exiting after more than 60 inches of penetration. This was a finishing shot after I shot through and through both of his shoulders, breaking both of them. I have shot through and through a blue wildebeast, knocking him off his feet at 312 yards and through and through a gemsbok at 196 yards for an instant one shot kill.

Granted, these are not DG, but based on PERSONAL EXPERIENCE on game--not imo--I don't expect my 520 grain round nosed cast lead bullets to bounce off a Cape Buffalo. He is, after all, flesh and blood, and THAT is a fact.

Newsprint is a discredited medium.

Your 45/70 was proved inadequate through a century's worth of experience in the form of the 450 Expresses using hard cast bullets. Even the 577 Express shooting hard cast bullets was considered a light rifle for buff.

The modern light DG rifles such as the 9.3x62 and 375H&H are the minimum sensible and legal DG cartridges and have proven themselves over generations.

Your opinion regarding the performance of the 45/70 on DG is based on nothing comparable.

When I write, IMO, I am basing my opinion on my actual DG experience. Almost all of that experience is based on using a much more potent .458" cartridge, the 458wm, at velocities with 500gr round nose solids from 2050fps to 2135fps and with 450gr flat nose solids at 2190fps. The three solids all worked on buff and elephant too, but the difference between 2050fps and more was apparent. Do some reading on Africa and you will see that 2050fps or so is about the dividing line with 500gr bullets. More works reliably, less does not. Again, while my pretty extensive - for a sport hunter - experience gives the nod to flat nose solids for penetration advantage, it isn't enough to make up for a six or seven hundred feet per second disadvantage. I dig for bullets and test bullet penetration by shooting elephants and buff I have killed so when I write, "IMO," it isn't without basis (I actually pay the trackers to dig for bullets while I watch and take notes and measure.)

BTW, I think it is foolish to venture into a wilderness area where there are elephants without an elepahnt capable rifle. All of the areas where I have hunted cape buffalo there were elephants and vice versa. Some areas have relatively calm and unaggressive elepahnts, some areas have really aggressive elepahnts but there are enough troublesome elephants anywhere to be cautious of. Plenty of hunters do hunt buff without elephant capable rifles - any modern DG rifle not loaded with solids is not an elephant capable rifle, but , IMO it is foolish

JPK

I love these arguments. They become so ridiculous. Obviously, some folks really need a really heavy caliber rifle for a particular species - even if the game itself does not necessarily require it. These same folks would not be caught dead with a .30-30 for mule deer or elk either.

Then there is the equating of the .450 Express to the .45-70. Another sad comparison. All Express cartridges were sadly underweight in bullets. Of course, Express cartridges failed and the reason is obvious.

There then comes the claim that some particular cartridge CAN out pentatrate a .45-70. Imagine that? Of course some can, and then some can't. And media issues crop up and god knows what all else. But if a fat .30-06 can be adequate (ie. 9.3x62), then certainly a souped up .45-70 can be adequate in the right hands.

Finally, there is always the legality issue, as if that justifies anything - the same people that make such claims as proof the the .45-70's inadequacy are the first people to tell you, in another context, how stupid one game regulation or another is and how the damn beauracrats that make such rules are obviously idiots on top of being ignorant. They are, nonetheless, infallible where cartridge minima are concerned (Whoa! Now that's a stretch!)

And the argument rolls on, and we ain't even gotten to the lever vs controlled round feed argument yet. In the end though, there are those PEOPLE that need a .470 Nitro and there are PEOPLE that do not. Meanwhile buffalo are still, as Sharpguy says, flesh and blood, and not really all that huge either. Can a .45-70 be used on Eland? They are afterall, bigger if not so grumpy.

Personally, were I to get an opportunity to hunt cape buffalo - I'd be looking for a Marlin right about now. 'Cause this whole thing is just too ridiculous to let it all go by.

Brent

PS. JPK, how many 500+ grain kills have you made with a .45-70? I suppose they were all dangerous charging rabbits though... After all, the .45-70 IS undeniably the king of all Dangerous Rabbit Rifles.... !

"PS. JPK, how many 500+ grain kills have you made with a .45-70? I suppose they were all dangerous charging rabbits though... After all, the .45-70 IS undeniably the king of all Dangerous Rabbit Rifles.... ! "

The same bullet from any cartridge at the same velocity results in the same performance. If you could get a 500gr solid from a 45/70 running at 2050fps then it would be a reliable DG cartridge. I do know that at 2050fps a .458", 500gr solid will kill DG reliably. From my actual experiences I come to the opinion that 2050fps is near the minimum velocity required to make a 500gr, .458" solid a reliable DG bullet. Interesting that my own experience, including penetration test in real animals, leads to a conclusion already realized by a century's worth of previous sport and proffesional hunters, game agencies and the market place. Those fellows who procede us were not the fools you would make them out to be.

Gotta love it when an arguement based on real experience and fact leads to a personal attack from a fellow short on the experience and in denial about the facts. Something about the 45/70 and the guide gun must do this to it ardent fans.

JPK

In other words, NONE. As I thought.

Brent

PS. I don't own a guide gun or any other lever action centerfire. But I might buy one if I thought I was going to hunt cape buffalo. God, why it bugs you guys so much is hard to understand...

JPK wrote, "Two similar bullets leave two rifles at different velocities and impact cape buff in "identical" shots. The fast one penetrates until it has slowed to the impact speed of the slow one; then it penetrates as far as the slow one."

This should be self-evident. If Garrett says otherwise, consider that they are not necessarily unbiased. They make money selling their bullets.

Now about lead bullets: I have seen plenty of pictures of deformed and misshapen SOLID bullets, somewhat poorly constructed, which went off course, etc. when they hit bone in large game. These are harder than any lead bullets. I will take a good monolithic solid over any hardened lead bullet for penetration.

A 45-70 will obviously kill a buffalo. Roy Weatherby killed one with a .257 Weatherby. I read about a guy who killed an elephant with a brain shot from a .222 Remington. He carefully machined a solid brass bullet and slipped it in the elephant's earhole.

The point is that killing a buffalo is not the same thing as stopping a buffalo. I'll take the .458 WM. And...if the 45-70 is illegal for shooting buff, why are we discussing it anyway?

BrentD,

You get it wrong. It doesn't bug me that some inexperienced fellow wants to try to kill a cape buffalo with an underpowred weapon, like the 45/70, but it does bug me when that inexperienced fellow, when informed of real facts - like the fact that its not legal, that it will very likely have insufficient penetration for many shot presentations, based on the actual penetration of more powerful cartridges shooting .458" bullets into real DG animal, that a century and more experience has proven that cartridges of similar bore, bullet and power are insufficient and that a century and more experience has also proven what does work - then goes on to tell one and all how all that experience of centuries, in the real world, is all wrong and how his story of shooting a moose or a bison or a wildebeest or a stack of wet newsprint proves that his wondergun is just perfect for a DG animal the fellow has not even seen in a zoo.

Like I said, the same bullet at the same velocity performs the same. Get that 45/70 of your shooting a 500gr solid or even a 480 solid maybe even a 450gr solid at 2050fps and you will have a reliable DG rifle. But not until then, no matter how hard you want to deny reality.

JPK

jpk, you have got your facts. Sharpsguy has his.

And then I have mine. And my fact is that I happen to know Sharpsguy, and thus, I happen to know for a fact that he ain't inexperienced....

And I'm quite convinced that so long as Sharpsguy or anyone else can pass up texas heart shots, the .45-70 is going to do just fine. You see, I have some experience with slow .45s and lead bullets too. And a lot of critters have died in getting that experience.

Sorry guy, you gotta have your big rifle and that's fine. You keep it. Until you get some experience with penetration with bullets WAY slower than 2050, I think I'll stick with Bill's facts 'cause they match well with my facts. Reality is hanging on my wall...

Brent

45-70 vs.375 vs..450 vs..416 test

.450 vs .416 Rigby


part 2 of .450 vs. .416 with .458
http://levergunluvers.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2737

Reflex264,

Your lastlink did not work. What was the velocity of the various 450 rounds in the other, first?, link? and what was the medium?

EDITED: Those bullets you show shot from the 450 show too much damage for a solid, except for the 420. Are they solids or are they designed to expand? What is the material, it seems brittle? The 420 looks sorta like a North Fork cup point both before and after, which in .458" weighs 450grs. The cup point expands some but not much, giving what some believe to be perfect performance for a cape buffalo bullet. The North Fork flat nose solids at 2190fps penetrate between five and six feet in elephants, more in cape buffalo. The greater the penetration the better for elephant, but the flat nose solids penetrate more than is required for cape buffalo at that speed, that is why the cup point, which penetrates about 20% less and leaves a greater wound channel, is thought to be so good for cape buffalo. I have not used the cup points though.

JPK

BrentD

You quote:
"Until you get some experience with penetration with bullets WAY slower than 2050,"

I have lots of experience shooting DG with bullets WAY slower than 2050fps; it all comes at the tail end of the penetration of my bullets which start faster and penetrate until they have slowed to something WAY slower than 2050fps and then, after they have slowed to that magic number WAY slower than 2050fps, they penetrate just like a bullet that started WAY slower than 2050fps.

JPK

In other words, the answer is still NONE, NADA, ZIPPO, AND NIL. Of course, of course, I understand you and your "facts" perfectly...



Brent

BrentD,

Like I said:



What part of grade school physics do you not get? The same solid bullet traveling faster will always out penetrate the same solid bullet traveling slower. This is fact. To pretend otherwise is silly.

I'll repeat:
Two similar solid bullets leave two rifles at different velocities. Both bullets impact cape buffalo in "identical" shots. The faster bullet will penetrate until it has slowed to the impact velocity of the slower bullet and then it will penetrate the same as the slower bullet.

JPK

JPK, don't try to bring facts into this. The 45/70 is the object of veneration of a cult. I live here in Livingston, MT just down the road from Big Timber and the two Sharpes rifle makers. Some of my friends are members of this cult and they just glaze over when you bring their reality into question. Every once in a while someone like Brian Pierce writes an article based on a single experience that confirms all they "KNOW TO BE TRUE". The prophet (Pierce, Garrett, whoever) hath spoken and any that doubt him are blasphemers and heretics!

I've shot and seen shot more antelope, mule deer and elk than most of the hunters I guided would ever lay eyes on in their lives. And yet, many of these hunters argued passionatly that I didn't know crap about selecting a proper rifle and cartidge for that sort of game.

Just because you've actually killed several elephant and a few cape buffalo and sat around the dinner table on more than one occation from those that make a living hunting dangerous game doesn't mean that you "really know" anything...

Boys, this has been done to death and always will be. Anyone heard of the Linbaugh siminar? This is a good place to settle it. Are physics defied ? No. Kinetic energy is not a value involved in penetration. Before you go off the deep end try this experiment yourself. Load a 550gr cast bullet up to 1400fps from a 45-70 or 450. Take a factory loaded 500gr fmj from a .458. Shoot the loads into "wet newspaper" but be advised you need at least 60" in your test box. Take the same two loads and shoot them into dry news paper. Please do this for yourself before you start explaining why it can't happen. The 550gr cast will out penetrate the fmj in the wet print. The FMJ will out penetrate the cast in dry news paper. DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. DO IT. Completely repeatable. The one bullet that I have had to totaly out pentrate every thing else in both is the 400gr encapsolated solid .416 bullet. Also repeatable.reflex264

Those bullets are hard cast deisigned for minimal expansion. The test media was a layer of dry vinyl coat to simulate bone followed by dampened vinyl coat to simulate muscle tissue. The 550gr Crater (JBY) was traveling right at 1500fps, the 420 Crater Lite was traveling 1765fps, the 460 CPB was traveling 1700fps and the 405 Magnus was traveling 1820fps. This media is super tough and is very hard on bullets. Several of the tests I have run involved shooting into super tough materials to test the structural integrity of bullets. So far the toughest expanding bullet I have tested is the .416 400gr Nosler Partition and the toughest solid is the .416 400gr Hornady encapsolated solid. Fact of the matter is that the slower less powerful cartridges are never totaly out of the picture and it has been proven over and over that they work better than they are supposed to. Common sense should come into play however. Anyone that doesn't shoot cartridges such as the .375 H&H and up doesn't realize that they do deliver impact damage directly proportionate to their relative kinetic energy.

In a similar discussion on another forum I posted the following:

People that don't shoot these things (.375,.416s and .458) on a regular basis have a hard time understanding. This certainly isn't saying the 45-70 is not adequate for the chores it is being used for now because we know that it is. What I see from wasting more powder and bullets than most people shoot in a lifetime is areas where the performance between the .375 and 45-70 overlap each other. Same thing between both and the .416,.458 and so forth. I still haven't solved the .416 400gr outpenetrating everything else yet but I feel there is a logical explanation. When I started this post my intent was to show that a living animal can damage a premium bullet as much as tough media. The difference being the bullet traveled farther in the water buff than in the dry vinyl coat thus exposing itself to abuse for a longer period of time. I know people commonly say that since animals contain moisture the wet media is more like real life but look at the bullets and note that the dry media bullet more closely resembles the bullet shot into the water buffalo. Cape and water buff are both designed by nature to destroy bullets. When you have hide up to an inch thick over some of the densest muscle on earth wrapped around big tough bones something has to give on impact. Physics are not really defied. They are mis-used. I have been studying some real kills and talked to several PH's about buffalo kills and the bullets used to make them. One thing I have learned from the gents that have had people carry Randy Garrett's ammo is that it works very well. Now how can it be that with lower kinetic energy and less matter displacement? As I have stated before on other posts in order to kill something you have to destroy what makes it live. Tissue destruction is a product of kinetic energy being applied to the tissue. Hydraulic expansion, blunt force trauma and shape cutting are all vehicles for this destructive force. When a premium expanding bullet at a realitively high velocity penitrates tissue it uses hydraulic expansion to displace matter. When a cast bullet with a large meplat travels through the same tissue it cuts it and apllies blunt force trauma. Randy Garrett suggests hitting bone such as shoulders to speed the process up. In this case the bone spray also becomes part of the destructive mass that displaces tissue. No mystery and no defied physics. Randy has enough experience to know what will happen when you send a big chunk of very tough lead where he tells you to. It has been proven over and over. In one instance that I have posted about before a hunter on a water buff that the ph said weighed about 2000lbs broke nervous and gut shot the bull. Thats right. GUT SHOT as in the stomach contents that have been known to stop solids from some pretty big boomers but the Hammerhead completely penetrated the big pile of guts. The ph told me that after he saw what the bullet did he had complete confidence in the loads used by the hunter. Once again no mystery. the bullet was cutting its way through the big critter. Since it didn't have to give up any more energy to cause hydraulic displacement it contiunued to travel through the buff. Stay tuned. reflex264

Reflex,

The reason for the results you note are that the round nose bullet at higher velocity tears a large wad of wet paper and continues to carry this ever increasing, in weight and diameter, large wad as it penetrates. This has the effect of increasing "bullet" diameter while decreasing sectional density.

The slower flat nose does not tear a similar ever growing wad.

With two similar solid projectiles, the faster solid projectile will always out penetrate the slower solid projectile in game - the only relevant medium. I haven't tried a flat nose solid at good velocity, say 2190fps, vs a similar flat nose solid at, say 1400fps in the irrelavant wet newsprint medium, but I wonder what the results will be.

There is no doubt in my mind that flat nose solids penetrate game better than round nose solids. But the question remains whether they do so because the tend not to tumble even after loosing speed as they penetrate. Round nose solids have a strong tendency to tumble after they have lost substantial speed as they penetrate. Fortunately, the tumbling begins after substantial penetration, but once it begins, the subsequent penetration is very limited.

JPK

And so it seems!

Reflex,

In repliy to your last post, which I did not see when I posted above, I too believe that flat nose "solids" or non expanding bullets improve penetration over round nose non expanding bullets. My test in elephants and cape buffalo point to about a 40% improvement. I am a fan of solids for cape buffalo too, but that may be the result of hunting with PH's who believe in solids only and so I have had opportunity to see them work. A cape buffalo dies very quickly when hit with a well placed solid from a large bore rifle.

If you want to turn your testing upside down, try shooting North Fork or GS Custom flat nose solids out of the 375H&H, 416 Rigby or Remington or 458wm or Lott.

If you look at the sectional density of the 400 or 410gr 416 bullets and at the velocity that you are launching them at you will see why they penetrate. You would need a 500gr .458" bullet launched at the same speed to approximate the same performance. Even a Lott can't do that, but a 450 Rigby or 460 Whby can. Alternatively, you would need to launch a 350gr or so 375 bullet at the same velocity as the 416 to acheive similar penetration. For that you would need a 375 Ultra mag or so. The answer lies in velocity/energy/section density.

JPK

Now, just so there is no misunderstanding, I have not hunted Cape Buff or any other dangerous game. I have been on 3 safaris to South Africa to hunt plains game. So, I have a little experience in African hunting but not much.

It seems the .45-70 supporters are concentrating on penetration. Sure, penetration is important but I believe other factors come into play. Heck, I can kill a Cape Buff with a .30-06 with a 220 gr solid, just like Ernest Hemingway did, but I don't consider it a proper "stopping" rifle in case things go sour. I believe energy also plays a part when it comes to putting some "thump" on a nasty beast that is charging.


Ernest Hemingway, February 1934

Take a look at this video and ask yourself rather you'd like to be using a .45-70 (no matter what type of load is used) or something along the lines of a .416 Rigby, .404 Jeffery, .458 Win or Lott or a .470 Nitro Express when things take a turn for the worse.

Click the pic to play the video:



Personally, if I ever get the chance to hunt Cape Buff, I'm going to use either my Ruger M77 in .416 Rigby or my Merkel double rifle in .470 Nitro Express. I'll leave it to others to experiment with the .45-70 Govt. If someone wants to use the .45-70, then that's fine with me. It's just not going to be my choice in a situation where I may potentially have to put my butt on the line, stand my ground, and shoot it out until it's over.

Just my two cents... Cheers!
-Bob F.

This 45-70/"Cowboy In Africa" concept really turns me off, and for a lot of reasons. I'd no more take a 45-70 to Africa than I'd wear bib-overalls and a straw cowboy hat from 'Cracker Barrel' on safari.........

I find it really funny (and hypocritical) that some of the characters who have embraced and blessed the "45-70 in Africa" idea in recent years have actually writted articles denouncing the 458 Win. Mag. as "underpowered" and without "sufficient case-capacity" in order to propell 500 gr. projectiles fast enough to penetrate well and to kill convincingly. Yet, the 458 Winchester cases has greater capacity than the old 45-70 case, and it does indeed propel 500 gr. bullets faster than the old 45-70 does. Some of these guys don't seem to know what they want, but they seem to be pretty sure that they don't have it........

Don't you just love revisionist ballistics.......?

AD

The part that does it for me is the fact that the cartridge is not legal for the game.

jim

But a 9.3x62 is? Yeah right!

Interesting point on the last several posts.Since Brian Pearce published what he did,it must be legal somewhere.Does anyone have a list of where the 9.3x62 and 45/70 are legal,or conversely,illegal?It might be instructive if we can see a link to terrain or usual method of hunting.

A simple way to discuss and put pay to this discussion is to apply the rules of the marketplace.

Suffice to say that if lever action rifles shooting low-sectional density 350-400gr hardened bullets at velocities approaching 1900 fps or 500gr bullets@13-1500 fps were effective and consistent killers of dangerous game, they would be all the rage in africa, particularly when one can pick up Marlin rifle for under 400 bucks instead of having to spend many times more for a well-tuned CRF type bolt or even a double.

It is an irrefutable fact that not a single african PH and the overwhelming majority of all hunters in africa do NOT hunt with the aforementioned rifle/caliber instead opting for either a bolt or a double. Again if a lever action "pumkin roller" worked one would see it in Africa from a purely utilitarian and economic aspect.

We also have the 458 Win Mag that was the african standard for many years even though it suffered from erratic and lower than advertised velocities. The reason for it's success I think was the demise of the Anglo twin-tubes and Kynoch ammunition.

Then the 458 Lott came out, and the 458 took a dramatic drop in popularity, even though modern powders rectified it's previous shortcomings. Why? because the Lott attains the requisite velocity/penetration with less fuss than the 458 Win Mag. Today the Lott is rapidly eclipsing the 458WM in africa by both PHs and clients. Market forces in play again.

It is also an irrefutable fact the 45/70 has an can take every specie of african dangerous game, but so have many other calibers and other weapons. There is even a recorded kill of an elephant with a 22 short and no doubt our smaller-brained ancestors (there's a lesson there) even felled the great beasts with sharpened sticks and rocks, so in that regard the 45/70 is "adequate" and to further carry the argument, Charles Lindberg's "Spirit Of St. Louis" was "adequate" for crossing the Atlantic. So if you want to and the laws allow it, by all means use a 45/70 or whatever other piece of archaic blunderbuss that blows air up your skirt, but don't expect a lot of us to go along with what is in my view a stunt pure and simple. jorge

BFaucett-

Thanks for the video - yea,....I want a 45-70 for that.


Gdv

Whomever said the 45-70 was only available in lever action rifles? I've seen many bolts and yes double guns chambered for this fine old caliber.
Also everyone seems hung up on this 500gr bullet weight thing when trying to dismiss the 45-70. A .458 bullet in 400,425, or 450 gr is just as easy to load in a .45-70 as in a .458WM and reach 2100+ FPS...granted recoil in a light lever gun will be horrendous while tamed somewhat in a heavier bolt gun.
Another item I read here posted by the ill imformed is a price of $400 for a new Marlin 1895...more like $550 + Still an off the shelf rifle though a very good everyday one at that.
Would any of the nay sayers like to hold up a cape buffalo hide and rib cage in front of their own body to see if a 400 gr .458 @ 2100fps fired from any 45-70 exits their own ass?

One more video.... not a charge but the Buff makes it into the bush and the hunter and the PH have to sort it out.

Click the pic to play the video:



-Bob F.

If you look closely enough you will find that often the PH "lets" the sport use whatever because the PH is there with a stopping rifle in case of whatever. Now if the sport is injured or killed the PH probably will loose his license because the beancounters doing the investigation will require it.

I think Pearce was hunting in Botswana for that buff, and there they require a .375 or 9.3 or more(and specifically disallow cartridges such as the .45-70).

Legal in Africa varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and even more so on private ranches.

jim

From one of the wholesalers I deal with:

MLG1895G
Manufacturer MARLIN FIREARMS
Man. Number 1895G
Title MARLIN 1895G GUIDE GUN 45-70
Description MARLIN 1895G "GUIDE GUN" LEVER ACTION CENTERFIRE RIFLE 45-70 GOV'T 18-1/2" BBL BLUE WITH WALNUT STOCK 4-SHOT TUBULAR MAGAZINE
Quantity Price None
Price Each $426.50

Sorry, I was off by $26.50.

Levers were discussed because a previous poster brought it up as a rifle he would like to try and hunt with. Even the most ignorant among us know the 45/70 is available in single, some bolts and in dubles. But since Terrence, (aside from his bad habit of lying and forging pictures of other hunters trophies claiming them as his own and uses multiple logins here and elsewhere) lacks the mental acumen to read and comprehend, it bears restating in the hopes he might GET IT:
The fact that a {sic} 400gr 458 bullet @2100 can penetrate a buffalo's rib cage is not in doubt but rather it's ability to range into the vitals with that bullet's low sectional density.

It was so simple, even a caveman could understand it, but once again I over estimated Terrence's ability to comprehend even the most basic english. BTW Terrence, you were dimed out by one of your hunting buddies that you & "Mocassin Joe" are one in the same. And I'm still waiting for your buffalo & leopard pictures from Zimbabwe, hopefully they weren't from Phil Lozano's photo album like last time. jorge

Well, Jim, when you are the "sport" do you really think your PH will loose is license if you are killed, perhaps using a .375 Steyr or other less than humungous cartridge?

And Jorge, would you outlaw a 9.3 that costs the same as Marlin .45? I am sure you are lobbying to outlaw push feeds and ALL off the shelf rifles as unsafe of course.

And Bob, that buff getting to cover, it could never ever happen wit a REAL DGR cartridge right? Right!

There is a heck of a lot of nonsense being spewed here. Sometimes I think the very notion of anyone using a .45-70 somehow threatens your own self images? Why else do you run to the battle with such fervor. I could care less what you choose to use, but why do you care so much what I do NOT use?

You would, of course, outlaw all handgun hunting of DG across the boards right? And I know how you all detest archery. It goes on and on.

I gotta go out and buy me a .45-70 one of these days. It's more gun than I need but apparently, it's just barely enough according to you guys.



Brent

Brent: I never said anything about outlawing any cartridge and if you read my post, I readily admitted the 45/70 HAS taken the animals in question, I just don't care for it and I don't even own a 9.3 and you can use whatever you want. I hunt with pushfeeds all the time. Weatherbys to be sure as I don't care for 700s. But it still begs the question that if this grand old cartridge (45/70), around since the 1870s and fielded in many actions/rifle types, why is it that it never took hold for hunting of dangerous game?

One would have thought that a man like our Teddy Roosevelt, instilled in American pride would have selected this cartridge for is great safari and with the powder/bullet improvements we have today why is it that the caliber is non-existant in africa today even by American clients? We'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue, but at least your disagreements come by honestly. jorge

A 375 Styer meets minimum requirements, so does a 9.3x62; the 45/70 does not - for WILD cape buffalo. Shooting farmed animals is a different issue.

JPK

Thanks George you just proved a point for me!
BTW where are you hunting buffalo this year??? (other than your own fantasy)

edited to ask: George would you like to hold that rib cage up and see if the lowly 45-70 can blow clear through you?...As I thought all mouth no balls

[quote=JPK

A 375 Styer meets minimum requirements, so does a 9.3x62; the 45/70 does not - for WILD cape buffalo. Shooting farmed animals is a different issue.

JPK[/quote]

that this makes sense to you says a lot about your experience. Still zero, isn't it.

Oh please.... You're just being argumentative. I put the video up to help demonstrate that Buff can be tough customers.

Watching the tape it's obvious that they waited too late to fire the first shots. They did not fire until the Buff had started to walk, then run away from the hunters. That wasn't really wise. But, it DOES demonstrate that even with very powerful weapons there are no guarantees. No cartridge is going to overwhelm a Buff. But, when hunting dangerous game such as Buff, I think it pays to have as much power in a cartridge as the hunter is able to handle effectively.

-Bob F.

I'll have to settle for "fantasy hunting" this year. Same place you hunted your leopard and buffalo. You know Terrence I often wonder what makes guys like you "tick" in the fact you apparently get so much pleasure in posting under false pretenses, multiple logins, etc., just to lie about things you've never done and antagonize people. There is no rational explanation for your behavior other than you obviously have some issues bordering on psychotic. You've been kicked off this site under your old login names of BRS, Otjiwarongo, jetdriver and others I can't recall as well as over on AR where you also used multiple logins and multiple lies. I know you hunted Namibia, but never Zimbabwe and never dangerous game and so do most of the forumites here. You are booked for your first buff hunt in Tanzania this year with another 24 Hour Forumite. I don't know him from Adam and I hope your safari works out well and I'm sure if you are successful, you'll all of a sudden get a revelation and pictures will appear on here.

As to the subject of balls all I can say is you sure are brave from behind your computer, but being that I've seen your photos that Retreever posted over on AR, can't say I blame you but take heart that eventually I'll make my way to our place in Pennsylvania where I'll be sure to let you know and give you the satisfaction of telling me in person. But until then
still waiting on your pictures from Zimbabwe to prove me wrong. jorge

Brent,

I sold my .376 Ruger in favor of a .375 Ruger.

The office people do notice if something happens to a client, and they will pull the PH's ticket. It being Africa though, such actions are subject to "negotiation".

Some jurisdictions in Africa do allow handgun hunting or archery hunting, more do not. Since I am in the business of selling these hunts I tell the folks when something is illegal. What they choose to do with the information is up to them.

For myself, I like to try other methods. (By the way I swapped Woody a pistol cartridge rifle for the new Indiana rules for one of his crossbows.)

have a good...

jim

And I thought the members here were civil. My mistake.

Taken from Buffalo Bore's Web Site


Ed Seyffert -Cape
Buffalo taken with Guide Gun & Item 8A Complete penetration thru both shoulders

Item 8A: 430 gr. L.B.T.- L.F.N. - G.C. (1925 fps / M.E. 3537 ft. lbs.)

I have hunted in South Africa with a Marlin 45-70. (with apologizes to allenday). Worked quite well for plains game, however I did have a waterbuck run about 100 yards after the shot. And it is a fun little gun to hunt with. Now the crux of this argument is this: Can you kill a buffalo with a 45-70? Yes. You could also use a 30-06. The real question is: Are you going to STOP him if he decided to come after you? And that is why we have minimum DG calibers. Just to end this argument once and for all, if I was wealthy, I would hunt 100 cape buffalo with a 45-70. If I was still alive after the experiment I would publish the results. Here's another way of looking at this. I consider a 243 to be on the marginal side for whitetails. A good shot should be able to hunt with this cartridge for a lifetime with no problems. However, If I was hunting in Saskatchewan for monster whitetails that can go up to 300+ lbs, the 243 would not be on my short list of cartridges. There are better calibers.

RAC,

Good post!

The first time I was in South Africa (in 2000) hunting plains game in the bushveld, I thought to myself, "Boy, a Marlin Guide Gun in .45-70 sure would be a sweet little rig for hunting in the bushveld." (Where ranges are usually short.) I have nothing against using a .45-70 for plains game though I've never used it in that role.

Also, I have nothing against the .45-70 cartridge itself as I've owned several over the years though I never hunted with any of them. I don't currently own a .45-70, but I have owned a Ruger No. 1, a Marlin 1895, a Browning 1885 single shot, and a Browning 1886 lever action in the past.

But, as I stated above, I would not chose a .45-70 for Cape Buff (or any other African dangerous game except maybe Leopard). I just think there are better cartridges for the job.

Cheers!
-Bob F.

No comment on the .45/70/cape buff either way, but a point of clarification. Pierce hunted in Zimbabwe, with Touch Africa safaris,I believe.

Mad dog

Thanks for correcting that. I was going to check the back issues, but hadn't got 'round tuit.

Zim has an energy based cartridge rule, and the .45-70 isn't legal there for buff either.

jim

Buff have been killed with the 22 Hornet, but that does not make it the best tool for the job.

[quote=BrentD
that this makes sense to you says a lot about your experience. Still zero, isn't it. [/quote]

BrentD,

I have only repeated facts and my opinion; I have not attacked you personally but you have resorted to attacking me, I suppose since your side of the "argument" is so woefully short on facts and experience to offer in support. Recall, you are the one with no experience with cape buffalo or other dangerous game. Recall that I do have significant experience with cape buffalo and other dangerous game.

Go back and reread your arguments. To call them inconsistent would be misleadingly complimentary. You hype mass then velocity, ignore sectional density, ignore physics, ignore history, substitute advertising for fact, pretend one animal is the same as another, you criticize DG managers for coming up with rules and regs in an effort to keep people alive and whole and based on history and experience - while having NONE yourself, but mostly you just bitch and whine that people don't agree with your wildly inflated, baseless opinion of the capabilities of the 45/70 on dangerous game, especially when it is compared to the capabilities of cartidges actually designed for use on DG.

JPK

JPK,

Not to divert the thread, but along the lines of the smallest sensible weapon for cape buff or lion. I now have a good 375H&H but some years ago my most powerful rifle was my 350 Remington Magnum. Mine is a rifle not a carbine and will push 250 grain solids or X bullets from barnes some 2500fps. Barnes indicates that the solids are appropriate for cape buffalo. I can also load 280 grain swift A frames to 2350 fps.

Some time back I hunted with an African P.H. and asked him about these loads on buff. He said that they would work if the client was a good shot and that they were pretty much a modern version of the old 350 Rigby.

I feel that these loads are enough for lion because they have proven to be effective on the big bears. Do you think they are enough for lion? What about buff? I personally don't see them as much different from the 9.3x62 or the 9.3 x 74.

Your thoughts on the suitability of the 350 Mag and the 9.3s would be of interest to me.

Britt

Here's another method of taking Cape buffalo and other african animals along the same lines of "adequate" and "it can be done" Personally, I'll pass on the concept: "Traditional" Hunting...

jorge

JorgeI-

I haven't seen anything for a long time that has bothered me as much as that video.

George

im thinking there are two different discussions going on......on is on HUNTING buffalo and one is on STOPPING buffalo....the question is, should the CLIENT have a hunting rifle or a stopping rifle? ive read all over the place that guides would prefer the CLIENT to have a 375 that they shoot well to a Lott they are scared of. personally i cant see how the 45-70 with modern loads and heavy hard cast bullets is inferior to the 375H&H inside of 100 yards for a HUNTING rifle. if i had to STOP a buffalo i sure in the hell would rather have something more than a tad bigger than the 375 or the 45-70. so i guess it comes down to do guides expect clients to be hunting with a stopping rifle?

rattler, I've so far avoided getting drawn into this discussion but: IMO, I want to use something large enough to get myself outa trouble if it came to it. here, 400 gr and 5000 ft-lb is the bar for me (either my 416 or 470). I'd use the 375 in a pinch but wouldn't feel totally comfortable with it.

Utah...........i really see no problems with that resoning my point was inside 100 yards for a hunting rifle i dont think there is much differece between a correctly loaded 45-70 and 375 H&H...if someone can handle a bigger rifle and wants to use it, by all means do so.....i would love to take a 416 Rigby over.....or a 450/400 double.....not sure that i could handle a 470 but would be interested to try one out

the 470 is actually more enjoyable than the rigby. more recoil but slower (and the gun fits better). that said, you wouldn't want to try shooting a left hand stocked 470..

When it comes to Cape buffalo or any African DG, I have only one motto:

Select a rifle that is as fool-proof, reliable, and powerful as would be necessary to handle any possible situation that might be encountered on safari. Treat the entire enterprise as if the PH wasn't there - as if YOU are the only person in the world who can pull your fat out of the fire if things get ugly. Adopt that mindset, and you'll do well.

The worst kind of foolishness, and the worst kind of outright stupidity, is to risk your safari investment, as well as your life or the life of someone else over a trendy theory of some sort..........

AD

im not likely to be headed down your way any time soon Utah to be able to try it out anyways still pissed my buddy sold his 505 Gibbs exactly one week before i got up the nerve to shoot it.....he said it made a hell of a fun pronghorn rifle biggest critter he shot with it was a shiras moose a buddy of his wounded and was headed straight away from them for the next zip code, said he hit it a tad high and it took out most of the spine. most impressive bang flop his buddy ever saw

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 bullet@2150 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

Jorge,
The Army did in fact adopt several different lever action rifles at various times.You may remember that famous quote "That damned Yankee rifle you can load on Sunday and shoot all week."
The reasons given at various times for avoiding adoption by the ordnance boards were,as you mentioned,a fear that there would be too much wasted ammunition,adding headaches to the supply train because there were already such an enormous number of different single shots in inventory which used different parts,and the fact that they were more expensive than the single shots.
These attitudes were so strong that Trapdoor Springfields were used more heavily in the Spanish American war in 1898,than the Kraggs which were already standard for six or more years at that time.Guard units were still armed,in many instances ,with Trapdoors well into WWI,when the 1903 Springfield had supposedly been service standard for 15 years.
Reliability was not apparently an issue with Spencers or Henrys winding up on the front lines for certain units,and both of those were many times pointed to as having provided The Union with the margin of victory in a number of specific engagements.
The main reason that they were not generally adopted had more to do with the inertia of ordanance people who were too wrapped up in the past,and unwilling to engage in the future.

Good post Steve and I can't say I disagree totally, but Henrys WERE woefully unreliable on three distict issues. First, the underside of the reloading tube was open, allowing debris to cause stoppages of the srping loader as well as the knob itself always got in the way of your hand if you weren't careful. Second, the open breech on top also caused debris and jamming issues, as well as the "artillery style" loading mechanism,ostensibly a brass block with a groove that "served up" the cartridge to the breech so the bolt could close it.

These problems were sequentially fixed in the 1866 and 1873, but the breech still remained unable to cope with higher pressure and bigger cartridges until the 1886 and by then, the writing was on the wall with the 1888 Mauser and French Lebel and of course then when the Spitzer bullet designs appeared and smokeless, the levers were just left behind. Not even the Marlin in 1895 could compete with that. But yes inertia as you say did play a part initially in the 1860s but by the 90s, military arms were rapidly changing, like the Mauser 88, 92 & 98 respectively and in our country the 30/40 Krag-Jorgensen (1892, didn't last long either.

Today, no doubt pumkin rollers like the 45/70 have achieved a new lease on life with newer powders and even rubber nosed spitzers, but is till does not answer my original query that if the 45/70 and levers were up to task, they would see wider use in africa when clearly they do not. Cheers, jorge

BrentD,

I have shot buff with .458" solids at 2050fps that did not exit on top down insurance shots through the spine, and once, as a bull was falling toward me, about 4" away from the spine angling for the opposite side of the bottom of the chest cavity. What rational explanation makes you believe that a bullet, even 40grs heavier, traveling 700fps slower would make an exit? Even if it is a flat point?

I have shot buff front on with the same bullet and velocity and not had an exit.

I have shot buff in the stern or hard quartering away with 500gr solids at 2135fps and they have not exited - though they made it to the vitals.

There is no magic in a slow moving bullet, even a flat nose, especially when the bullets integrity is a question. Anyone who has shot a buff with a 500gr or 550gr Woodleigh solid has shot a buff with a slow moving, heavy .458" bullet - its just that the bullet penetrated quite a bit before it became a slow moving heavy .458" bullet.

I'll repeat again:
Two similar bullets leave two rifles at different speeds. They impact a cape buffalo in identical shots. The faster one penetrates until it has slowed to the impact speed of the slower bullet and then it penetrates the same distance as the slower bullet.

What could be more utterly evident?

And Jorge's comments regarding the complete lack of any 45/70 following amongst those who depend on reliable performance on DG highlights the 45/70's marginal or less performance.

These 45/70 flare-ups all come down to "If you pay for me to go shoot a cape buffalo with a 45/70, then I'll go do it." I got news for you - if someone would pay for me to go shoot a cape buffalo with a 45/70, I would do it too. For $10,000 or so, I'd take the risks and enjoy the hell out of myself tracking and stalking, waiting for that elusive perfect shot opportunity. But if it's my money, to hell with the 45/70 and to hell with the risks, I'll bring a proven adequate DG rifle and cartridge.

JPK

I'd hate to see someone get into trouble over some romantic theory that became, for all intents and purposes, obsolecent with the advent of smokeless power..........

AD

AD, it became obsolete for you. Sadly, I might add.

Guys, have fun with your toys. But please try to resist raining on everyone else's parade, particularly when you haven't used such that sort of toy yourself.

Meanwhile, I'm wondering if you turned yourself in Allen? certainly the 300 was not legal...

Brent

Jorge,
I'm sure there are many reasons why lever action rifles and the 45/70 were never popular in Africa.Not the least of them,by any means was perceived effectiveness.
It is only in the last 30 years or so that the 45/70 could be loaded to the levels that it can achieve now.However,based on your own post,it is now capable of pretty much the same ballistics as the 45/400 or the .404 Jeffreys,which many have considered eminently suitable.If not in a lever action,and there are many who have claimed they can achieve the requisite velocities in a leveraction,those velocities can not only be equalled but exceeded in a modern bolt gun or single shot,and I would assume a properly set up double if one were to decide to make one.
Aside from that,there is the old "not invented here syndrome."Almost all the original African hunters were Europeans,many of whom were from the "upper classes" who in the victorian age looked on Americans and things American with a rather juandiced view.They also had a lot to say about what could and would be imported into their colonies.
As far as the mechanical problems associated with the Henry rifles are concerned,they are really no different from the types of problems the military has faced with all kinds of equipment,especially rifles,over the years.You may remember that many an Indian War trooper lost his life when trap door Springfields tore the heads off rolled copper cartridge cases,leaving the body of the case lodged in the chamber,and effectively turning the firearm into a nine pound club.
And in our lifetime there is the case of similar problems with the M16 in Vietnam,though for different reasons.Those two firearms,having the backing and committment of the ordnance people (which the lever guns did not) went on to have the longest active service lives of all US martial Rifles.Also it should be noted that there were a number of other lever action rifles available at that time,all suffered from the same lack of having a "champion" within the ordnance boards and though the designs themselves had much to recommend them,the designers mostly lacked the capitol,both financially and politically to gain access to the inner circles that controlled such things.
I know it may seem that I'm picking a dog in this fight,but I'm really not.Look at the post I started this thread with.I have some real questions in my mind,and I'm trying to get a clear picture of the real reasons behind what exists today.
For the record,I'm leaving for Tanzania in less than three weeks with a CZ 550 Safari Magnum express in .458 Winchester Magnum.I am taking it largely based on a series of PMs and a couple of extended phone calls I had with you about ten months ago.
Much of the reasoning and experience I have seen posted on this thread,for both sides of the argument ,seems to carry validity and goes pretty well to answeing my questions.Unfortunately , quite a bit of it falls in the category of "because I said so" which doesn't carry a whole lot of weight in either direction.

I remember the phone calls. Can you show me the ballistics to comapre the 450/400 and the 45/70 in terms of Sectional Density velocity? If I remember correctly, the 450/400 400gr bullet has an SD of 330 and a 400gr 45/70 has somewhat less SD so there's a disparity. Can a 500gr 45/70 be driven SAFELY to 2150 plus in a lever or any action?

I don't think the M-16 brings relevance to this argument. yes it was unreliable when it first came out but it quickly became very reliable although it's small projectile is still disliked by our men afield.

As to the lack of popularit of the 45/70 & lever in Africa it's simple: It doesn't work. I think JPK's postulate of similar bullets of the same caliber at different velocities pretty much put pay to that issue. It's obvious that people believe what the want to believe and will not allow facts to get in the way. Good luck in Africa and your 458 Will be great! jorge

Jorge,
Your assumption that that particular bullet shape must be used is just that,an assumption.Take a look at some of the penetration documentation on the Garrett sight.There's quite a bit.Pretty much any bullet in .458 can be loaded in a 45/70.I'm not saying they will all work magnificently well,but there is an ever growing body of evidence that many will work magnificently well.I think that many people involved with "African" rifles and cartridges are a bit too caught up in romance and tradition,and a bit too dismissive of alternatives,based on much less knowledge and much more intuition than they care to admit ,even to themselves.
Granted , I can't speak from an enormous backlog of personal experience in either direction.However , not much learning occurs in a closed mind.I don't really know,but I know that I don't know,and all I'm trying to do here is learn.

Jorge,
The reason I brought up the problems with the trap door and the M16 was to emphasize that the problems with the Henry were really not much different.If the Henry had been adopted,I am confident that the problems with the Henry would have been rectified,just as they were with the other two.

Steve: the data on the Garrett site regarding penetration is very biased to show penetration of their product. There was an extensive discussion on this over on AR a while back and it definetly showed the data was flawed. Bottom line there is you can't SAFELY push a 500gr bullet out of a lever at 2100 plus and once you fall below 1900 penetration really suffers.

Re-read JPK's posts they are very good, a lot better than I could explain. As far as the "romantic" stuff, sure there are many of us like that, but gents like Allen Day with extensive african experience have no use for the romantic stuff and use only the very modern stuff as do I & others to a great extent. Sectional density is what it as and so is velocity and there's no getting around that.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree but here's my bottom line: The 45/70 is an obsolete cartridge that under the right conditions can and has taken all the world's game and so have lever actions but in that regard so have black powder muzzle loaders and even spears (see the video above) and it STILL does not sell in africa. So if anyone wants to do it go for it. Pesonally I think it's a ridiculous notion for DG.

But I have to ask, why aren't you taking a 45/70 with you to africa, even as a backup rifle? Again good luck on your hunt. jorge

could be the $200/rifle permit no need to have 2 rifles pushing the same bullet at 2100fps. Buy a box of 450gr TSX .458 and load them in either the 458WM, 458Lott or the 45-70 push them with H4895 to 2100fps and they do exactly the same thing....so easy a cave man or wannabe could understand it!

Jorge,
As I said,I don't really have a dog in this fight.I'm mostly playing The Devil's Advocate,trying to learn something.If I could afford it, I might just try a 45/70 safari,though I'm not sure I'm totally convinced yet.Not so sure I'm totally convinced against it either.
As far as back ups are concerned,I have a .300 Win mag,.35 Whelen.,350 Rem. Mag,and 9.3x62 .....and I'm not taking any of those as back up either.I am taking two Leupold 1-4x20 scopes in identical Warne quick detatchable mounts though.Both sighted in for Barnes TSX 450s.

Steve1

You write:
"I think that many people involved with "African" rifles and cartridges are a bit too caught up in romance and tradition,and a bit too dismissive of alternatives,based on much less knowledge and much more intuition than they care to admit ,even to themselves."

The entire situation is actually the reverse of that you descibe. While few individuals may possess enough real experience with enough different rifles and bullets and cartridges to be able to give advice "you can take to the bank", those who do (or did for those who have departed) advocate similar performance bechmarks. Interestingly and importantly, those benchmarks also mirror the "natural selection" of a couple of centuries of DG hunting by thousands of different hunters from the evolution of the 4 bores and exploding shells to todays DG rifles. And this evolution is relfected in the minimum calibre and energy laws in effect today.

On the topic of the 45/70 vs the 450/400 or 404, its not bullet shape that Jorge is writing is the issue, it is sectional density, momentum, energy per unit of bullet frontal area. This relationship has a tremendous influence on a solid bullet's abitily to penetrate real game animals - not the artificial mediums that others would have you believe are relavent. This relationship is inescabable. It is why Bell was able to kill elephants with a 6.5 and 7mm, why a .308" solid can do the same.

The sectional density for the 400gr .458" bullet is .272. That is below the tried and proven ~.300 minimum that evolved over more than a century. 450/400's came in two (really more but the majority fall here) bullet sizes, .408" and .411", SD is .344 and .338 respectively. The 404's 400 grainers go .319. 400gr 416's go .330 and 410grs go .338. .458" 480gr bullets, the 450 NE standard, .327; the 500 grain .458" for the WM and others .341 and the 550, suitable for the Lott, Ackley etc, .375. The 375's 300 grainers go .305. similar for the 9.3's 286gr bullet, also similar for the .458" 450 grainers. Remarkable consistency, proven over a century of real experience by thousands of hunter running the gambit form one time sport hunter to life long ivory hunter to today's professional hunter.

The group that is romanticizing and using (misplaced) intuition and suposition and without substantial experience is the group advocating the 45/70 and relying on irrelevant penetration tests in irrelevant mediums and a very few real experiences. And talk about dismissive of other alternatives!!!

JPK

I'm just a relative newbie at this with just three safaris under my belt but when guys like JPK, Allen Day and others here with many, many safaris under their belt tell you the 45/70 is inadequate, I think I'd listen to them.

Most of us anyway, really do know the 45/70 is inadequate, as inspite of all the hoopla from it's most strident supporters here,they give the 458s the nod instead of the 45/70.

I guess I along with most here and every PH in africa are in error as none of us can grasp the idea the 45/70 is the equal of the 458 Win Mag and Lott. I'll say it again, NO WAY you can get 2100 fps with 4895 and a 450gr bullet out of a 45/70. Max velocity in the Hodgdon site for a 400 grain (they don't even list the 450 in the 45/70) was under 1900 fps. And here are the super hot loads from the Garrett Website:

GARRETT'S 45-70 EXITER AMMO
$180 / 20 CTGS

500-GRAIN SPEER TUNGSTEN SOLID AT 1530-FPS

FOR USE ONLY IN MODERN WINCHESTER, BROWNING, AND MARLIN REPEATING RIFLES.
ENERGY: 2600 FT/LBS; TAYLOR KNOCKOUT VALUE: 50; MEPLAT: .235"; CHAMBER PRESSURE: 35,000-CUP; SMALL-PRIMER; CCI 41 MILITARY-SPEC PRIMER; CUSTOM SMALL PRIMER POCKETED NICKEL-PLATED STARLINE BRASS; TRAJECTORY: +1.5" @ 50-YDS, ZERO @ 100-YDS, -6" @ 150-YDS

Don't see 2100 fps anywhere and I don't think 50 grains less bullet weight will effect a 600 fps increase in velocity.

Considering on what side of the discussion my opinion falls, I consider myself in good company. jorge

jorgie, jorgie jorgie, stop worrying about 2100. You don't need - well maybe YOU need it, but the rest of us don't.

Brent

I'm all for letting those who foolishly take a 45/70 for buffalo do so. In time it will lead to less buffalo being killed by less surviving hunters.

I've done it with 416's and also with several different 9,3X74R's. In retrospect, it was foolish to use the 9,3, but each time I was hunting something else when buffalo too good to pass up were encountered. I used good bullets up to the task, as that is all I carry in Africa...never a smaller, less tough bullet, even when hunting the smallest PG.

I have enough experience with a 45/70 that I consider it a handicap, not something desirable when hunting 1,700 pounds of muscle and bone that would like to kill you. It just makes no sense.

I love to hunt with the 45-70. It wouldn't be my first choice for Africa by any means based on what little I know of African hunting However, I'm sure it could be used successfully in many venues there as long as one was willing to compromise (with emphasis on the back-up's involvement- much as one might of bowhunting or handgunning for a big bear.) That said, I think it might be instructive to shoot a few thousand-pound-plus ungulates to the west of the Atlantic rather than the east with the 45-70 and other things before becoming dogmatic about what a 45-70 bullet can - or may not- do. A northern moose is a big tough animal, though rarely prone to temper tantrums involving pestering hunters. They are not difficult to kill though they tend to die on their own schedule. Watching that happen a few times with what are typically much lighter rifles than what are used on the big buff of Africa, I can only recall three out of nearly ten times that many which tipped right over at the shot. One was with a 30-06 (my first), the other two with the 340 Weatherby. Of three I've shot with the 45-70, two were hit well initially and at less than 50 yards. Had they been inclined to turn my footprints into a salsa bowl, they had enough time to make a go at it before they expired.

" Had they been inclined to turn my footprints into a salsa bowl, they had enough time to make a go at it before they expired. "

I got a good chuckle with your line above. I can "see" the salsa bowl. Not a pretty sight.

JPK

I see no reason to play "The Devils Advocate" in this discussion. No reason to talk someone into trying something they may not be up to the task on. No reason to try and talk someone out of the task they may not be up to the task on.
These days it is popular to try or do things to get puplic attention. Both good or bad. It pays the bills to make videos of puting yourself in situations where you get to stop a charging wounded buffalo. I have watched these videos but I would not put my self in an intentional situation to experience this. I watched a gent from down under play with crocs and slippery things to only meet his demise from a freaky accident of a barb through his chest from a sting ray. The accident was freaky but he put himself in that situation of danger to market himself in a way that required this risk for him to make his fortune. Their is an audience for someone to go to Africa and make a good amount of money marketing himself as a buffalo killer of the highest order wearing some type of khaki colored cowboy hat and khaki colored bandana useing the 45/70 as his weapon of choice. I might even watch an episode or two. But I am not into stunts to trick up my life or to market myself in any such way for monetary gains. Life is too hard and tricked up as it is and I work to damn hard for my money to casually pass on the choice of a 375, 416, or 458 for hunting DG. If your gun case does not presently have a bolt or double rifle in it and all that you own is a Sharps single shot or a Marlin or Winchester lever action with a bore diameter of 45 caliber or over, do not consider the 45/70. Unless you want to market yourself as the next Quigley and sell a ton of videos. I do not need to sell myself as a magazine writer so their is not real reason for me to try these stunts. For me I do not find the need to trick up my hunting or life. It is not worth it. Simply their is a better choice for you to spend your money on if you are an average hunter.

Playing "The Devil's Advocate" as a phrase,or as an action has nothing to do with trying to convince anyone of anything.It is an attempt to draw out either side in such a manner as to explore all sides of the issue.As I stated in starting this thread,I am trying to stimulate a dialogue,not a fight,and in the process learn as much as I can.....from both sides of the issue.
I would just as quickly have played "The Devil's Advocate" in the other direction if the thread had played out differently.As is through the thread,and various PMs I have received,I have learned a lot.There are those on both sides of this issue who treat this much as they would politics or religion.They don't easilly suffer their dogma challenged.They will have learned less than some others will.
Interestingly,when I initially brought this question up on another thread ,AussieGunWriter predicted that this kind of acrimony was exactly what I would see.
For the record,once again,I'm taking a .458 Winchester with me to Tanzania in two weeks.After I get back I'm going to do some serious research and experimentation with the 45/70 and perhaps similar cartridges.I'd like to have some hands on experience before making up my mind.
The one thing that both sides agree on so far,is that bullets like the .458 Remington flatpoint,though capable of killing cape buff in some situations in any of these cartridges ,is not a really good choice.There seems to be a body of evidence that longer,heavier bullets,even though driven at lower velocities,can do the job all out of proportion to their "paper" ballistics.Anybody see a parallel to the long accepted rational for the effectiveness of the various 6.5s ? And so it continues !

Hunting bufffalo with a 45-70 is like hunting small game with a .22 Short instead of a .22 Long Rifle.

Sure, it can be done but why bother? What's the point?

Why bother to hunt dangerous game with a double rifle ? It's basically obsolete in many people's minds ?It's pretty much an eletist proposition,most people can't afford a decent one.A good bolt action in an effective cartridge is a much more practical way to go. But a safari isn't about practical,it's about adventure,and romance,and for many.....steeped in tradition.
Many on this forum would tell you that a good double in a proper chambering is the best of all choices.
There are those who would only like to follow Ross Seyfreid's lead and take cape buff only with a revolver,I just met a good friend of one such man today.He has taken two cape buff with a revolver,and is planning to go back for more.He feels those big ole rifles take the challenge out of it.
Why do it with a bow ? Yet we all know that there are those who only thirst for that.....yet somehow they seem to get treated with more respect than someone who wishes to do it with a well set up 45/70.
I have never seen Karamoja Bell denigrated in print,yet he took over a 1,000 elephants with 6.5 mm and 7x57 rifles.
I personally am not advocating any of it.I certainly wouldn't advocate just anybody doing any of it,even if it was legal,which apparently is questionable in most places.But what if we are talking about a serious researcher and handloader,who has credible data on specific loads in a specific firearm,and who has experience with taking all manor of big game leading up to cape buff,is it really fair to make your analogy of .22 short/.22 long on small game ? I submit that neither you or I have the experience to make that call .I'm not sure that many who are so against it have the background with 45/70 with those longer bullets to make that call either.
There are several serious big game hunters and 1000 yd. competitors on this forum who believe this proposition has merit.I just think we shouid get a better idea of what they have been doing and evaluate that more closely before we just throw them under the buss.When I get the chance to do some experimenting and researching myself,I intend to find out.
Perhaps these 45/70 guys don't have the goods,then again,maybe they do.It ought to be fun finding out.

I have no real dog in this fight, as I pretty much like .416's, but would like to point out a few things:

Brian Pearce used his .45-70 on a private ranch in Zimbabwe, and apparently there are no caliber restrictions on private land. Also apparently, his load had plenty of penetration.

I have seen such bullets from a variety of black-powder cartridges do amazing things, including killing 2000-pound bison within a few steps. Bison are not as aggressive as Cape buffalo, but they are bigger, and not easy to kill either. Have seen one run around quite a bit, after soaking up .458 Lott bullets in the general chest area.

I have also been on safari with a guy who used a .50-110 Winchester lever-action with 475-grain hard-cast bullets started at around 1500 fps with genuine black powder. He killed a good buffalo, pretty much anchoring it with three quick shots in the shoulder. Eventually he put eight shots into it, but the first 3 were fatal. It did not die as quickly as mine did (shot with a .416 Rigby), but then again I have seen buffalo take more than 8 shots from supposedly adequate buffalo rifles from .375 H&H to .458 Lott.

My partner's PH never felt the need to use his .470 double on the buffalo, so it was indeed pretty well anchored. Afterward, this PH swore he was going to get himself a lever-action, similar to my friend's, and use it on a bunch of stuff.

Just about everybody has a different definition of adequate. I was in RSA for almost 3 weeks this spring, and at one point was invited by the PH's involved to go along as a sort of extra PH/backup on a Cape buffalo hunt. This was after they had seen me shoot some--and had discovered I had some 286 Woodleigh solid handloads for my 9.3x62. These guys had plenty of experience on both buffalo and elephant, and felt confident in the the 9.3x62. Maybe they are nuts. I didn't have to shoot, so don't know--but I do know the right 9.3 bullet in the right place will do very well on quite large game.

I have also been on safari with more than one PH who said, "If it makes the client happy, why not? It's his safari."

Have also yet to hear about anybody getting beat up by a Cape buffalo that was shot with a round like the .45-70. The stories I have heard have all been about buffalo wounded with what are generally considered "appropriate" rounds.

JB

Welcome JB.That's pretty much my point.Just about everybody who is hoot'n and holler'n about how those cartridges won't work has plenty of figuring,but no empirical evidence that they are correct.
As I mentioned earlier,I used to hear the same kind of stuff about the 6.5s when I first started carrying them into the field.I've killed deer with 6.5 Arisaka,6.5x57,6.5x55.Worked neat as you please every time.A guy who was hunting near me one time shot a young buck four times with a 30.06.The deer was lying on the ground letting out the most awful bawls,no more shots.I was carrying a 6.5 Carcano as a kind of rainy day rifle.
I ran to the sound,spotted the deer thrashing on the ground at about 65 yards.One shot ,entered the chest just left of the center line,exited the right ham.Quiet deer.
The guy had run out of bullets.Never thought he'd need more than four.That deer bawling was the worst sound I ever heard.
Shortly after that, articles started appearing in the magazines about how 6.5s kill all out of proportion to what one would normally expect from the paper ballistics.
The 6.5 Carcano is about the least powerful of all the common 6.5s.That was empirical evidence that it could do what so many had been saying (this was 35 or so years ago)that it could not possibly do.
There are several guys who have PMd me about their empirical evidence backing up the 45/70 since this thread started.They just don't want to be subjected to all the invective.If they change their minds , they can speak for themselves.The nay sayers have yet to come up with their empirical evidence to back up their position.

Generally, I have found that a great many cartridges exceed their "paper ballistics" if you point them right at something other than paper.

JB

My point in all this is that the average hunter would be better served by not using specialized cartridges and firearms for DG. We could throw in big bore handguns as well in this argument as far as I am concerned. All these types of weapons have worked. If you are a lever gun or Sharps nut then by all means go ahead. I worry about the average guy reading this on the message board and trying to save a few bucks on their first big game safari and getting themselves and someone else in trouble. Remember if a bad shot is made with any type of weapn and the game is not recovered, then that animal could still be out there, sick, and ill tempered. The next client may have to deal with the situation where you were afraid of getting hammered by the weapon you really did not shoot that much and put one into the bufs gut. Specialized weapons could also be a super magnum that will punch you into next week.
Before making the choice for a specialized weapon (hot loaded lever gun, large bore pistol, or a big bore super mag)on DG ask yourself if this is the type of gun you normally enjoy shooting alot. If so you already know you are up to the task. You got to this point by being passionate about your choice of arms. Understand their are those out there that will pick up a gun a a week before a hunt and will try and tackle anything. I think we should not get caught up in the minutiae and encourage responsible choices. We would all be better served. It is not fun to be the client to follow up some dude who screwed up and you have to sort out his mess.

Sure. Hard to argue with that.

But now I am wondering how many of us have gone to Africa and run into Cape buffalo that were pissed off because somebody shot them with a .45-70.

I have run into a few angry buffalo over there, but the reasons were snare wounds, lion wounds, wounds from fighting other buffalo, and the love of their little calves. But have yet to even hear of a Cape buffalo that was pounding people because of a .45-70 wound.

JB

I don't think anyone here is advocating either the more powerful modern cartridges/rifles or the 45/70 hot loaded,or with more traditional loads with longer heavier bullets for "every man."
Somebody who goes out and gets himself an expensive custom rifle in the latest .460 whizbang,but doesn't shoot it enough to learn how to handle it,or is afraid of it,is far more of a problem than the guy who is familiar and comfortable and most important, competant, with something less powerful.
We are really debating here,whether a 45/70,45/90,or 45/110 etc.loaded with proper bullets and proper powder charges in a well set up rifle can be an effective rifle for cape buffalo.We are assuming that the shooter we are discussing knows what he is doing and has the requisite level of skill to make whatever
shot(s) are presented to him.As Mule Deer pointed out,there have been more than a few instances where cape buffalo have been shot multiple times with a .458 Lott,and failed to cooperate and just give up the ghost.
Were these instances caused by the use of the wrong cartridge or rifle? Probably not.The fault of poorly manufactured projectiles ? Perhaps .Fired by somebody who was not properly prepared to handle his chosen cannon ? Most likely.
We have other folks who can tell us about cape buff being taken down almost surgically clean by properly set up 45/70/90/110 Sharpes or lever action rifles by fellows who have shot them often and regularly on the range and in the field for years.Are their successes just dumb luck ? After all ,even the blind squirrel finds the nut once in awhile.I don't know from my own experience,but it seems to me that there are too many of these folks with essentially the same stories for it to be nothing more than a few lucky SOBs getting away with a stunt,or a series of stunts.

I think we can credit that to good PHs. I watched one empty his 416 Rem into a wounded buffalo, a real BIG one...while it was hi-balling it back to Tarangeri Park after being shot 4 times with a 9,3X64 with 250gr A-Frames, totaly inadaquate for the job. The PH put four shots into the heart/lung area with open sights at about 100-125 yards, into a running buffalo. It fell about 1/4 mile short of the Park boundary after the 4th hit by the 416. I put two 9,3X74R 286gr Woodleigh solids into it, also, but too far back.

MD I did not specify any cartridge.

I will be specific about one thing. A DG hunter better take it serious and put a good quality bullet in a very vital spot.

But believe me you will care less what bullet or cartridge is causing the ruckus you have found yourself in the middle and are left to sort out some gun loonies problem who thought it would be fun to hunt something big in Africa someday without investing the practice time in shooting a large bore rifle.

I will give you a hint, you are only thinking of saving your butt. Later you get to cuss the person that left you to sort his mess.

Have fun but take DG hunting serious.
You have to understand their are those out there that really dont have a clue and do not use good judgement. Not everyone is a good rifle loony.

When you fellow decry a lack of empirical evidence that the 45/70 isn't enough gun for reliable use on African dg, you ignore a whole century of emperical evidence that proved that the 450 Expresses were not up to the game. Not all 450 Expresses shot light 350gr bullets either (though none that I know of was shooting over 500gr bullets either.) For elephants a four bore rifle, sometimes used with exploding shells, was not unusual. For cape buffalo a 577 Express shooting 610gr hardened bullets at 1650fps was considered light, an eight bore rifle was considered a good reliable buffalo round. Both are in very different leagues than the 45/70 with any load. And these fellows learned there lessons through trail and error. This is the emperical evidence you are missing.

And don't forget, all of these big, big bore black powder rifles, which were needed for reliable performane on African DG went by the way side beginning with the introduction of the 450 Nitro Express and its 480gr bullets at real velocities of ~2100fps.

The reason that Bell was able to brain elephants with his 6.5 and 7mm and why a .308" solid will still kill elephants with a brain shot today is sectional density and energy per unit of bullet frontal area. Same then, same now.

JPK

You miss the point.Not what is on paper from the past.Show me where properly set up 45/70/90/110 etc. have failed....that is your brief in this discussion.
The brief of the proponents of those rounds is to show me where they have succeeded.
Their claim is that certain weight,length,and style of bullets in certain alloys will in fact fully penetrate a cape buff any which way you please.
You can't argue from bullets of unknown alloys,of lesser weight,and of unspecified form ,even though probably close,and be 100 % sure you KNOW the answer.Thirty five years ago plenty of knowledgeable guys KNEW that the 6.5s couldn't be counted on to do what a .243 or .257 or even a 30/30 could be counted on to do.

bg
You over-generalize the "average" guy who goes to Africa for a DG hunt. The "average" guy who WOULD go to Africa will have saved his hard earned cash for years and will have had quite a few range sessions with his big bore, usually a 375 H&H. Every guy I've ever run into who's gone across the pond has made every effort to make his "dream hunt" right. This is by picking the right rifle and cartridge combination and practicing with it and by reading everything he can get his hands on concerning the very subject. As it's neither here or there, I would probably worry less about the "average" guy than the clown who would knowingly go with only a 45/70. One thing that's not mentioned as to Lupo's jaunt quite a while back is that his ph had to shoot quite a bit to make "his" safari right. He used a 45/70. Most who would use a 45/70 will be doing so to PROVE a point. What that POINT is, I haven't the foggiest. Shooting non-dangerous game is quite OK for the cartridge and should be left at that.

For the last 50 years, African PHs - and a great many of them - have griped about the limited case-capacity of the 458 Win. Mag., and the resultant low velocities (certain specific rifles, with certain lots of factory ammunition and handloads) that have limited its ability to penetrate well with 500 gr. bullets, plus deliver less than the desired amount of energy. Those are just some of the reasons why cartridges like the 458 Lott came into being in the first place.

And yet, the good ol' 45-70, which performs, in all reality, well below the 458 Win. Mag., is the new "wunder cartridge", especially with some sort of newfangled cast bullet (sort of like the JFK "magic" bullet theory, I guess!) that kills buffalo like a shot out of the heavens, and with total and complete reliability. And all for the price of a Marlin Guide-Gun, plus a hatfull of ammo loaded with magic bullets, and maybe a scope!

And some of the guys who have been promoting and embracing this 45-70 malarkey have on pervious occasions killed Cape buffalo (or they so claim) with handguns, and some of these same whizbangs have also written articles that denounce the 458 Winchester as "under-powered", "too slow", "limited energy", "limited case-capacity", etc. And yet the 458 easily out-performs the handgun cartridges they so glowingly reported on, as well as the 45/70! But, the 458 is found lacking, and the REAL under-powered stuff isn't!!!!!!!!!

And then you have the guys who have the zinc-plated gall to claim that you don't need anything more potent than the 45/70 for buffalo, that energy just doesn't count when it comes to killing power (only penetration!) and this from guys who have yet to kill a Cape buffalo with ANYTHING. Some haven't even set foot on the African continent yet!

Now, is it just me, or does something simply not play right through all this??????

I'm starting to think that there's some sort of convoluted priority here that's more about revisionist theory and down-home style points than real physical reality..........

AD

The only reason we hear more about buffalo being wounded with 458 Lotts etc., as opposed to 45-70s, is that real DG cartridges are used hundreds of times as often as 45-70s, which, after all, are illegal for DG. So we hear more about their results, good or bad.

As for ignoring history, remember that the original 45-70 became instantly obsolete for North American game as soon as the 30-40 Krag with a 220 grain bullet at 2000 fps became available in the 1890s. Instantly!

Now we have, of course, more powerful loads and better bullets for the 45-70. But we also have the same for the various .300 magnums. The difference remains. In fact, a 30-06 with a solid bullet will out-penetrate a 45-70. It has a bullet with better sectional density hitting with more velocity. But I wouldn't pick a .30 for DG either.

I am not impressed with shooting through docile Amrican bison. Any 300 Magmum with premium bullets will do that.

If someone wants to hunt with a 45-70, that's fine. But I can't see the cartridge as the best choice for any game, dangerous or non-dangerous.

BTW: A 550 grain bullet at 1500fps has less striking energy than a 30-06. Kind of shabby.

Indy,

Whether a bison is "docile" or not has nothing to do with shooting through one. I suspect you would be surprised about shooting through a big bull with a .300 magnum and most "premium bullets.

JB

I've never voiced my opinion on this subject, although I've read on the subject time and again on other forums. I haven't read all of this one but despite what has been said about the 45/70 lever gun or the traditional DGR's I have made my mind up. The 45/70 would work. Is it optimal, hell no. Adequate, probably. I'd shoot one with my 35 whelen with heavy bullets. These are my opinions though. Guys its a matter of opinion. You have yours,I have mine. I would love to test my theories, alas I probably never will get the chance short of winning the lotto. I could be wrong about the 45/70, I've never been to Africa,and all the guys saying it wouldn't work have never shot a buff with one. You really want to prove something doesn't work, show me. I would rather see someone go after buff with a 45/70 than a bow or a small caliber rifle(6.5X55,7X57). Use what is legal,shoot accurate and finish the job you start. But by all means continue the debate it's good reading.

You Have done this and know it to be fact??

Once again, we have a bunch of people who have never done it, never witnessed it, and never will, pronouncing what will happen.

JB

Indy, I'm with you on all counts.

It's not a matter of IF a 45-70, 7mm Mauser, 30-06, or 300 magnum will penetrate through a Cape buffalo (at least some of the time!) or even kill him. As has been detailed a bit, I've done so myself with a 300 Win., and yeah, WDM Bell killed elephants with a 7mm Mauser. I also remember an old and respectable article on the 30-06 in Africa in an old 'Sports Afield' annual from the 1950s that showed the author with a dead buffalo he killed with an Ought-Six. So yes, it can be done, and it has been done, and in all likelihood it will be done again.....and again.....and again..........

The question is, is all of this "fringe" stuff ideal for Cape buffalo under all possible conditions, and is it (Great Motherhood Theory time!) "just as good" as the more potent, more modern, or better-by-design stuff? The answer is, emphatically, NO! Not now, and not ever!

I can't think of anything, quite honestly, that's more unpredicatable than Cape buffalo hunting, that is, unless it's grizzly and lion hunting. You absolutely never know how a given day of buffalo hunting will turn out. You might hike all day without a shot, you may kill one the easy way (through the lungs of an unagitated bull @ 100 yds.) or you may kill one at 20 FEET, and I've done it all ways. You may also survive a scary episode that'll make you wish you stayed home in bed that day. You may also live with the memory of a close and dear friend killed by a Cape buffalo, as I do each and every day of my life.........

Either way, the prudent hunter will put a margin of error on his side by going with a cartridge that's adequate under ALL conditions, not just ideal conditions. There is an element of RESPECT, and thus, preparedness that you can demonstrate and inject into the whole program that just might save your life, or the life of someone else.

This isn't some kid's game - some sort of inane experiment like trying to figure out if a 7mm-08 Improved will kill a whitetail as deader or deader'n than a 270 Win. - this is about you health, welfare and safety, plus that of others.

Is it really necessary to overstate the obvious, or is someone going to have to needlessly and stupidly get stompep or die (once again) for a misguided, convoluted theory in order to prove the point?

AD

You have just made all the other arguments go out the window. It is always better to use larger then needed for hunting or self defense.
When things go bad, bigger is always better.

When ever and where ever the 45/70 is challenged the faithful come to its defense. The loyality this cartridge enjoys is truely impressive.pak

The 45/70 was not made obsolete by the 30/40 Krag.It was rendered temporarilly obsolete by the end of the Indian wars,and the end of the buffalo.You will note the 45/70 never completely went away,in fact it may be more popular today as a sporting cartridge than ever before.When was the last time any rifles for the 30/40 were produced in any meaningful quantity.
The cartridge,in it's original form,with 500 gr. RN bullet was designed by the military for two major purposes.One was to retain lethality at very long ranges,which it did,and in 500-560 gr. or so bullets it still does.Retains it's accuracy way out there too,as seen in the 1000 yd. matches.
The other was to penetrate horses,big cavalry horses.Secondarilly to that,they wanted it to shoot through the horse and hit another horse in a massed charge,hopefully taking two combatants out of the fight on one shot.Tertiary to that was to be able to shoot through a horse,from whatever angle,and get the native american warrior hanging on to the off side while still shooting at you and your buddies.It did all of these things admirably.
Phil Sherman and Phil Sheridan were masters of total war.They honed their thinking during that famous march of theirs through Georgia.After the war,they directed the various campaigns against the Indians.They understood immediately that the entire economy of the plains tribes depended on the buffalo.
Accordingly the military made a strong effort to propagate and support buffalo hunting.That included often "surreptitiously" supplying lots of cartridges and bullets and powder to various buffalo hunting parties.Guess which cartridge they had available to supply without having to account for any unusual requests.
Buffalo hunting (or really shooting,there wasn't much real hunting involved) of the day consisted of shooting a stand.
That comes down to keep shooting as long as they stand.
To make that work ,the shooters had to be far enough away so that the noise wouldn't spook the herd ,and the bullet had to be effective enough to drop the buff pretty quickly.If it started running around wounded,the herd would stampede.To make this operation economically feasible,they had to drop as many buffalo as possible in one area,so that they could process 100-200 animals in one spot before packing up their goods and moving to the next "stand."
Yes the big fifties stand out in legend and lore as "the" buffalo rifle.But free ammo and components went a long way to making sure a hell of a lot of 45/70 cartridges were used too,and they worked very well....on "wild" not tame buffalo.Estimates are that there were 60,000,000-100,000,000 buffalo on the plains in the early 1870s.The buffalo hunting ended in the mid 1880s.With new buffalo constantly being born while all this was going on,perhaps 200,000,000 buffalo were actually slaughtered,perhaps even more.A very large number of them were shot with 45/70 and very similar cartridges.Almost all with one shot apiece.Almost all at 200-300 yds.The practice required them to be pretty much DRT,or the herds would run off before the crews were ready to process them.
Of course those guys were probably far better game shots on average than all but the very best today.They shot hundreds of head of game every week.However,those old cartridges did what they needed them to do.That is empirical evidence.

Steve1 just think what that old caliber is capable of with today's greatly superior powder and bullets.
Have you ever wondered why some claim the 45-70 has no use and consider it an old caliber, yet endear themselves to other calibers designed around black powder? Have you ever seen anyone dispute 2100fps from a 45-70 reload that loads for a 45-70. Or have you wondered how a 270gr .375 from an H&H is an accepted buffalo killer/stopper but a 500gr .458 @ even 1800fps is a stunt hunt?
Just this morning I watched an archer drop a cape buffalo with an arrow during a follow up to a prior hit. He hit the bull at the neck base on a facing shot, the bull took two steps backwards an fell over. A 450 Dakota couldn't have dropped it any faster without a CNS hit...fact is no caliber could've dropped it faster without a CNS hit and even the lowly 270 Win could drop a spitting mad bull in his tracks with a CNS hit.
I thinkyou hit it spot on when you posted early on how the "romantic calibers" have their following among so many. Some posters just seem to feel if they've never used it it can't be good. One even admitted to killing a couple with a 300WM but claims a 45-70/400-500 gr bullet won't stop a bull. Go figure!

I was asked my opinion on this subject and I have given that opinion based on my experiences and how I make choices that concern how I like to hunt. For me when I am after DG my 375 is my light rifle. I think the 375 is a very nice cartridge that I wish I could use more. I do not see it as a big cartridge personally. I could use a 9.3 but I really like the 375. I am allways prepared for buffalo. I will blow off a stalk on something else to go after buffalo. My experience also says that I am prepared for the unexpected that I have encountered as well. It is not uncommon for other DG hunters I have talked to to increase the horsepower of their DG gun after a safari or two. It is a very personal thing.
I dont care what you use.
Hell if my time wasn't so valuable I would go to africa every year and try the lever action for the hell of it. I dont have an unlimited amount of time. When I go after buffalo I am serious an do not have time to play around. I do not need to promote myself in anyway. I just have to get back from the safari, take care of my family, and work to pay for another safari.
We were all asked for an opinion and both sides made good points. In the end we are going to do what we want. We are all big guys and life experiences have made us who we are but do not take cheap comments that degrade life experiences.
Their is not end to this discussion but for me I do not see it going any where else.

Obviously I have never shot a bison and never will. But I have penetrated (obliquely) a Wildebeeste three feet with a 180 grain Partition that ended up weighing 104 grains and measuring about 50 caliber. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize that a much stiffer .30 caliber bullet, weighing up to perhaps 220 grains and propessed much faster to stret with, will penetrate further than a .458 bullet with lower SD at 1500 fps.

[quote=IndyCA35 You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize that a much stiffer .30 caliber bullet, weighing up to perhaps 220 grains and propessed much faster to stret with, will penetrate further than a .458 bullet with lower SD at 1500 fps. [/quote]

And you have tried this and know for a fact that a 220 grain .30 Cal. will out pentrate a 450 to 500 grain 45/70 bullet??

Steve, I think you miss the point.

Sure the 30-40 is not chambered today. That's because of a new technological improvement invented in 1898 that allowed rimless cartridges to be used in bolt action rifles. They feed better and the Krag could not be used with clip loading. Today we have the .308 Winchester, just about the same ballistically as a 30-40.

And I suspect the only reason the Army standardized on the 45-70 in the 1870s was because smokeless powder had not been invented, not because of any vaunted penetration. It's pretty obvious what the Army did instead as soon as smokeless powder was invented.

Now one point I would like to correct: The 45-70 is a TERRIBLE 1000-yard rifle. Granted there might be special matches some place requiring you to shoot the 45-70. But aside from those, it's a non-starter. This is the 100th anniversary of the National Rifle Championships, held at Camp Perry, Ohio, every August. These matches include the scope sight championship (the Wimbledon Cup) and the iron sight championship (the Leech Cup). In all that time, no one has EVER won or come close with a 45-70. For 20 years the 30-06 ruled, then the 300H&H and, later, the shorter 300 magnums. Lately the cartridge of choice is the 6.5-284, though long range championships have been won at least once by the 6XC.

If you don't believe this, come to Camp Perry next month and enter the Wimbledon with a 45-70. I'll shoot a .308. Wanna bet who wins?

Indy,

Another case of never done it, but know all about it.

There are damn few .30 caliber expanding bullets that will penetrate all the way through a big bull bison's chest. A hard-cast .45-70 will do just as well, and usually better--and who limited the .45-70 to 1500 fps? That is faster than it can push a heavy bullet with black powder, but not nearly what it can do with smokeless. Which, I believe, is where this twisted web began.

You might also be interested to know that a gunsmith friend of mine, whith a Pressure Trace system, just did a bunch of tests with the .450 Marlin (same case capacity as the .45-70), .458 Winchester and .458 Lott. When loaded to the same pressures, the Lott showed around 250 fps advantage over the Marlin, with the Winchester in between. That's right, the Marlin could break 2000 fps with a 500-grain bullet, the .458 2150, and the Lott 2250.

Of course we have also seen here a few people inimating that the .458 Winchester really ins't quite, you know, totally adequate for buffalo, being as how the case capacity is a little too small and....

Next thing you know there will be a call to outlaw any cartridge generating less than 5000 foot-pounds with a 400-grain bullet. Isn't that sort of the direction this is logically headed?

JB

Very good post accurate and to the point.....+1

Two nearly identical shots on moose: broadside through the shoulders involving centerpunching the onside scapula, both more than 25 but less than 50 yards; both bullets "bonded premiums," the first 45-70, the second 30-06, both animals 1000 pound plus bulls, and both bullets recovered in virtually the same position, against the far side hide.



300 Speer Uni-Cor�



180 Woodleigh Weldcore�

(Shouldn't the 30-06 have penetrated better in this case given the choices of bullets?)

As I stated before, I have no experience shooting Cape Buff. However, I have seen the mass of the mounts and can tell something of their size based thereon. I would surmise that they would be at least as hard on bullets as the biggest North American ungulates, perhaps (probably) more so.

How about the esteemed 340 Weatherby and the vaunted-for-penetration Barnes-X bullet?

Another broadside moose, probably at least 1500 pounds, this one at around 200 yards. The bullet didn't exit although it did take out massive shoulder bones, a "stopping shot" if you will.



225X


One almost needs to see how "easily" a well constructed animal can stop even some great bullets from "powerful" rifles to understand the limitations. I don't doubt the thoughts and advice of some of the African experience guys here.

But at what pressure is the .450 Marlin operating at to achieve 2000 fps with a 500 gr bullet? Loaded to the same pressures as the .458 Win and the .458 Lott implies to me that all three cartridges were loaded to around 50,000-52,000 CUP (or whatever the Piezo PSI number is). A .450 Marlin cartridge loaded to that pressure would probably be fine in a bolt action or falling block, but isn't it outside the safe pressure range for a lever action rifle (Marlin or other make)?

-Bob F.

no it's not 60,000 is about top end on a Marlin 1895. I've personally pushed my 45-70 to 62,000 ...no sticky action, flattened primers,etc...but one whale of a recoil!

MoccasinJoe1,

According to the A-Square Manual:

.458 Winchester Magnum
Pressures Allowable, Maximum Average:
53,000 CUP
62,000 PSI

According to the Speer Reloading Manual #14 (page 711), "The .450 Marlin has a maximum average pressure of 43,500 PSI." I rather doubt 60,000 PSI is safe or prudent in a Marlin 1895 lever action.

-Bob F.

Let us forget all that. I must admit that I was getting a little far afield from what started all this, Brian Pearce's article.

I just read it again, to clarify the points:

1) The load was a 405-grain semi-flat-point (.340 aross the flat) jacketed solid at 1800 fps. It chronographed a few fps under 1800 fps from the 22" barrel of Brian's Marlin. Pressure was 30,000 psi.

2) His PH's were suspicious of it, since they had seen .45-70's used before. Under Brian's questioning, it turned out all previous .45-70's had been used with 300-grain softpoint factory loads.

3) Brian had to prove his rifle (and his shooting) because of PH skepticism. One of the animals killed before the buffalo was a big zebra, where the 405 penetrated 5 feet.

4) Brian shot the big bull through both shoulders (bone) at about 100 yards, about 1/3 of the way up, perfect according to most PH's. The bullet broke both shoulders and exited, whereupon it also hit a smaller cow through both shoulders. The cow dropped on the spot. This first bullet was recovered under the hide on the far side of the cow.

5) Brian had been coached on keeping shooting, so he did, putting one up the rump of the bull as it turned, and then one broadside through both hindquarters (all he could see at that point). The rump shot went through intestines, paunch, and top of the heart, and was recovered from the brisket. The hind end shot exited, going through both legs.

6) The bull went 25 yards before keeling over, the cow 0.

Please explain how this amounts to inadequate pentration--or indeed inadequate performance in any way.

JB

It doesn't.............

Mule Deer,

Dang if I can explain it. But then, I'm one of those that has not hunted Cape Buffalo. Of course, the ballistics of Brian's load is similar to the 450/400 Nitro Express except that the 405 gr .458 bullet has less sectional density than the .40 caliber (.408"/.411") 400 gr bullet. And the 450/400s, both 3" and 3.25", had factory spec velocities of 2100-2150 fps although actual velocities were probably a little less. (The original Kynoch ballistics of the .404 Jeffery were also similar with a .423" 400 gr bullet at 2150 fps.)

My best GUESS: Brian's load was still marginal but it was on just the "right side" of marginal to be effective. Also, Brian used a true jacketed solid and not a hard cast lead bullet. (The hard cast lead bullet always seem to enter into these .45-70 discussions.)

So, Mule Deer, the next time you hunt Cape Buffalo, or you going to trade in your .416 Rigby for a .45-70?

Cheers!
-Bob F.

Don't know. Am probably going next year, and bounce back and forth among several rifles, from my 9.3x74R double (very tempting, especially since it can hold a solid in one barrel and a soft in the other) and a .45 of some sort.

JB

Mule Deer,

BTW, I think we're mainly still concentrating on the subject of adequate penetration to reach the vitals. As has been mentioned before in this thread, the .45-70 has plenty of penetration to do that but so does a .30-06 with a 220 gr solid.

We know from his article that Brian did not face a charge or have to stop a charge. As I stated, I have no experience with Buff (or any other dangerous game) but my readings on the subject seem to indicate that there seems to be a difference in being able to kill a Buff (or Elephant or Rhino) as opposed to having an adequate "stopping rifle" for when things go sour. Do you think there is some combination of bullet weight, caliber, energy, momentum, etc. that comes into play that enables the traditional African dangerous game cartridges to have an advantage when trying to stop a Buff in a charge?

-Bob F.

The only way I have seen to surely stop a charge from a buffalo is to hit him somewhere in the brain or spine--or break enough legs that he can't run anymore. You can hit them with as many foot-pounds as you like (or bullet diameter or weight, or whatever) and the reaction will zero unless you break the charging machinery.

JB

I was really trying to stay out of this debate[its been beat to death over at accurate reloading for years now]. However, I went back and reread Steve1s opening post. He started out asking if it was "adequate", and before we get 2 pages into the thread, it turns into "it has to be a stopping rifle". What I found amusing is the constant "stopping the charge if things go wrong". What made this amusing was that I happened to do a search on Mark Sullivan over at AR[he brings up as much rant as the .45-70]. Here, naysayers to the .45-70 make it sound like there COULD be a charge behind every bush. However, when you read the MS threads, there is no way you can get that many charges. Even Saeed said he has shot over 100 buffs and has had no charges. One ph posted that he had hunted buff for 20+ years and was only charged once, by an unwounded cow! My only point here is that both sides get sooo passionate about their "side" that we tend to get away from the question asked.

Adequate yes, game stopper? maybe si maybe no. My take is if you are using adeqate bullets for the job, it comes down to "operator error" more than the machinery you are operating with. FWIW, I totally agree with everything Mule Deer has posted on the subject, so far.

I guess when this thread finally runs out of gas, we should start one on "Mark Sullivan using the .45-70 guide gun as a stopping rifle".

Mad Dog

What is your 9,3X74R DR? I was set on using one this Sept in Selous R2 and R4, but had some bad stuff that needed cutting out of me and had to bow out. I wanted to load up some North Forks, but they told me their bullets are not recommended for my small, light Chapuis UGEX. I have used a DT Tikka 512S 9,3 O/U in the past and two different combination guns in 12ga/9,3X74R. The 9,3X74R gets it done, but always has me walking on eggs a bit.

You keep bringing in more and more STUFF.The idea is to distill it down to less and less.I never even hinted that the 45/70 was better than modern cartridges at 1000 yards.The point is that it is a much more capable cartridge than many will give it credit for.I have no idea how it would do as a target round if fired by an equally set up rifle to those used at Camp Perry for target shooting.Frankly,I don't even care.That kind of shooting holds very little interest for me.
I never even hinted that I thought it was BETTER than the modern .458 cartridges for taking big game either.I just noted that so many just totally dismiss it out of hand as an African cartridge,having NO real experience with it,yet there is a body of evidence,noted by John Barseness and Brian Pearce among others,that would seem to indicate that 500+ grain loads in a
proper bullet in these older .45 cartridges can indeed be quite effective on animals at least up to and incuding cape buffalo.
The point is that many with no real experience are bashing this cartridge.I'm saying we need more information,not that it is better than anything.Maybe it is,maybe it isn't.
I find it puzzling when people have to go looking for reasons to bash something if they have nothing else to say.Stay on the course of the opening statement of this thread.THAT is what this debate is about.

Man, I spent the day cutting brush, sawing wood, and wrangling bees, meanwhile all of this has been going on - and on - and on.

Some pretty interesting posts here too. The antis seem to have the same old arguments, but the pro's seem to have some data - critters getting shot and killed. For those that don't like the idea, it sounds like you probably should not try it. For those that like to experiment, trying something different, or just plain dislike walking in lock-step to the march of allen and jorge's drum, the .45-70 does not seem outrageous by a long long shot.

We all have what we like and it does not all have to be the same. When I went to Africa, I had no interest in taking a bolt rifle in ANY caliber. I had no interest in shooting smokeless powder or copper bullets. It just does not interest me. I'd rather stay home. But instead, I took a single shot - in this case a Sharps because that's what I had ready to run. It happens to be a .45-100 and it downloaded it to shoot 1186 fps second with paper patched lead bullets because that's what I felt like doing. By many people's definition, this would not be the BEST choice, even for plains game. Yet, it WAS the best choice for me and I have no regrets about taking it. I shoot it well and an more than just a little familiar with it. In fact, it's the same rifle that is in avatar photo as well.

Now, as much as I would like to hunt cape buff, they are just a little bit out of my reach financially. If I COULD hunt them, however, I would not even think about taking a smokeless cartridge bolt rifle. It just does not interest me. At the same time, I am not sure I'd settle on my Sharps. Not because of the cartridge, but because it is a single shot. It can be fairly fast, but not quite THAT fast.

So, I would consider a lever rifle. An 86 or 71 Winchester set up for a .45-90 case and an 18" twist for 500+ gr bullets would interest me. Possibly a Marlin but NOT a guide gun (god those are ugly stubby things!). Loaded with 3fg Swiss or Goex Express, it should shoot in the 1350 fps range with 535 gr TEMPERED bullets. I'd be happy enough, the bullet would certainly penetrate just fine on any sort of quartering or broadside shot from ranges in the sub 50 yd category. And, if the ultra rare charge issue popped up, I would simply have to bear down and bust him in the brain - but then that's what anyone would have to do, so I see no disadvantage there.

As I am not an expert in lever rifles, I would be interested in discussing what can be do to improve feeding and ejection - as one apparently has to do with ANY off the shelf bolt rifle for it to be considered worthy of the DGR lable.

While many of you will undoubtedly insist that there are better choices for actions and cartridges, I just don't happen to agree where I happen to be the customer. Given that, what are the options, the possibilities etc?

Brent

PS. Someone on AR posted last week of shooting THROUGH an elephant with a .50-110 lever rifle.

luv2safari,

My 9.3x74R double is a Thieme-Schlegelmilch SxS, made around 1933, the best I can figure. They were a top firm before WWII, but like many they went out of business during the war. It has some engraving (no game scenes) and double Kirsten top fastener, with extractors. It has both a flip-up rear sight on the rib, and a flip-up tang sight, and with them regulates perfectly at 65 yards (about 60 meters) with 270 Speers, 286 Nosler Partitions and 286 Woodleigh solids and 65.0 grains of H4350, for about 2400 fps. (It also has bases for some weird detachable scope mounts. I modified a pair of Talleys for these, but of course with a scope in place--2.5x Leupold--the barrels shoot about 3" apart.) It weighs just over 8 pounds without the scope. I do not have any doubts that it will do the job on buffalo.

JB

Brent,

Why not take the Sharps? I know several PH's who are quite willing to take hunters with single-shots after buffalo, perhaps because hunters with single-shots tend to make good first shots--which is by far the most important shot in buffalo hunting.

JB

JB,
because I would like to hunt close and that makes my Sharps not quite optimal - in my book. I should add that my Sharps has a 32" barrel and tang sights. Both of which tend to slow down the loading process.

If I built a Sharps with a short 28" barrel, and if I could shoot with barrel sights like Sharpsguy does, I might consider it. The loading trough of a Sharps does facilitate loading w/o looking and a new one will shuck spent cases, and save you from picking them out.

I would be a bit more inclined to use a highwall in a single shot for something like this - it cocks on closing. But I think a lever would be interesting, and I just don't have one. I once had a Belgium-made BLR but that was an abomination of a rifle. A good (old) 86 Winnie is attractive to me. I have nearly bought one a couple of times.

Brent

Gotta love the cries of "NO EXPERIENCE." The fellows with the relevant experience are the fellows who have hunted cape buffalo; not the fellows who have, with a 45/70, shot eland or moose or bison or whatever other animal that is not a cape bufalo.

Any 45/70 advocate posting here shot a cape buffalo with a 45/70, or shot a cape buffalo with anything else?

If you 45/70 advocates would go shoot a cape buffalo with a 458wm, as I have done a number of times, you would think that advocating hunting them with a 45/70 was nuts - as I do. After killing my first three with 500gr solid bullets at 2050fps, I spent a hell of a lot of time working up loads in an effort to find a faster, better load with more penteration that would shoot to regulation of my filed in sights for my subsequent hunts. The difference between 2050fps and 2135fps with the 500 grain bullets is obvious as hell. And a flat nose mono metal at 2190fps is better yet. Slowing any bullet down five or six hundred fps isn't going to make it a better penetrator in animal flesh. And the hardened cast bullets seem brittle as hell too.

Remeber, two similar solid bullets leve two rifles at different velocities. They impact in "exactly" the same shot. The faster bullet will penetrate until it has slowed to the impact speed of the slower bullet, and then it will penetrate the same as the slower bullet.

BTW, a zebra is not a cape buffalo. What makes a cape buffalo difficult to penetrate to the vitals from the rear quarters or dead astern is the three part stomach that has been FULL of grass in every cape buffalo I've seen butchered. The grass eats energy and penetration. Plus his bone structure if you hit that, the zebra's bone structure is nothing to speak of while the cape buffalos is very substantial.

If a rifle can't fire a bullet at a velocity that will produce reliable penetration to the vitals, it isn't a suitable, or adequate, rifle for cape buffalo. (This is why, if you read the buffalo bullet posts, you will see that I am an ardent fan of solid bullets for buffalo, at least for the second and subsequent shots.)

JPK

1) Have you actually read Mule Deer's post ?
2) Do you actually know anything about cast bullets ?
3) Do you actually know anything about the specific cast bullets these guys are using ?
Every post you have made on this thread is a rehash of what you've posted before.I'm not discounting what you've said....but you're not contributing anything new.
These blackpowder shooters are mostly shooting round nosed 540 gr. bullets specially formulated for TOUGHNESS , their alloys are designed to avoid brittle bullets.To a man they report penetration that the paper ballistics would not seem to support.
Apparently you chose to ignore what Mule Deer reported,and what too many others have reported, to just ignore.Why do you insist that your experience is all that's valid ? No one has dismissed you as casually as you have dismissed them.Until you see evidence that they actually can not accomplish what they have claimed,no matter what seems to make sense to you ain't necessarilly so.It won't be the first time this has happened to smarter more experienced men than either you or I.Sometimes what would seem obvious just ain't necessarilly so.

Why settle for a big bullet at low velocity when you can have a big premium bullet at high velocity? Seems a little like seat belts, not having it on makes no difference for months or years but the one day you need it you really need it.

I dunno Bob, but I do know that breaking 2000 fps with a *300* grain bullet was more of a reloading adventure than I care to undertake, in my 45/70 Guide Gun. That stretchy action makes it hard for this yokel to read pressure, and I was at max loads for any written data I could find for levers.

I simply can't believe my Guide Gun would do 2000 fps with a 500-gn bullet. Maybe one of the full-length versions would.

I've also found the Guide Gun, at least, to handle recoil poorly. That straight stock is pretty brutal. It's a lot better with irons. If you scope 'em and have your head waving around up above that lack of a comb on the stock, that sucker will whack you on the side of the cheek hard enough to hear cartilage creaking and popping all through your skull!

That's how it worked for me anyway.

My opinion on the cartridge for buff is useless. Biggest thing I've killed is a spike elk. I'd choose a "proper" African rifle just for the fun of it, if I were ever to go on such an adventure, myself. Just to get the tone of the thing right, you know.

-jeff

This has been interesting to wade through. Sort of related - does anyone remember the Gonic ads that had Cape Buffalo in them and touted the Gonic as the equal of the .45-70? Does Gonic still exist? Did anyone in fact use one on buffalo? Best, John

Here is an interesting thread - sort of related. A lever action, a .50-110 and some strange bullets. I'm not sure if these are bronze or lead.

I don't know why he used such a short barreled rifle, but in any event, it is an interesting rifle and some interesting hunting.

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6321043/m/560100986?r=908100007#908100007

Brent

I must admit that I am no expert on bison having never shot one. But my friend Tommy Carpenter is an expert if one exists today. Tommy is a member of the Crow Nation of Montana. Tommy's job includes guiding for the free ranging animals on the huge resevation as well as culling and dealing with problem animals.

Tommy also helps run the annual round up where mounted tribal members push the herds to low country for a census and for tradition's sake.

Tommy's favorite stopping rifle is a 264 magnum which he uses for antelope,deer ,elk,and bison. Tommy says the big bulls are quite dangerous but the 264 is plenty of gun if a fellow places his bullets carefully.

My feeling is that one should be cautious about viewing what is enough gun for bison as enough for cape buff because in many ways hunting for them is apples and opera , they are both big potentially dangerous bovines but when have you heard of anyone riding herd on cape buff with a cow pony and shooting the mean ones with a deer rifle.

Britt

Steve1,

You entirely miss the point of my repetition of the facts. Me or Allen or Jorge or.... post an answer to you or BrentD's or Muledear's or... post and then you all respond so that they all read the same, "But a 45/70 shooting a (fill in the blank) penetrated a (fill in the blank with any animal other than a cape buffalo) this many (fill in ther blank) feet and so there is just not doubt that the 45/70 is (choose: adequate, more than adequate) for cape buffalo and those fellows who have killed cape buffalo with a modern DG cartridge (fill in the blank - but really most obtuse when the fellow you are responding to has shot buff with the much more powerful .458" cartridges) and have had the opportunity to obseve bullet penetration, cape buffalo bone structure, the huge belly full of grass, the tencity of life, bad attitude that cape buffalo possess just don't know squat about killing cape buffalo.

Add in your repeated deflection of the century of experience of prior hunters in the 19th and earlier 20th century sorting out for real what bore, bullet and velocities were required to reliably kill DG in Africa prior to the advent of the nitro express cartridges.. The point that bullets have improved is a reasonable point, but the fellows back then were hardening their bullets too. Remember, a 450 Express wasn't up to the job. A 500 Express wasn't up to the job. A 577 Express was just adequate. An 8 bore rifle was considered reliable cape buffalo medicine. The rifles that worked are three or four leagues beyond the 45/70. If you think I'm blowing smoke, do a lttile reading of the first hand accounts of those hunters. Often a good read, always informative. Try Samuel Baker, he was into rifles and into effective results and did a lot of experimenting.

For you and other that keep trying to equate cape buffalo and bison, real history shows that it just isn't a comparable game. Take the open plains and "distance" shooting for multiple kills from the same herd, a "hunt" where the shooter gets to choose his shot presentation, very different from the typical short range, thick bush hunt for cape buffalo in much, but not all, of its range. Gotta wonder if the bison hunters would have abandoned the 45's, even 50's, under the same brush conditions and/or the bison had the always pissed attitude of the cape buffalo. Different physical charectristics too of course.

I am not a hardened cast lead bullet expert, by any means. But I do know that when I see a photo of a spent hardened cast lead bullet, it is almost always missing chunks of bullet and showing signs of being brittle. Take a look at Reflex264's post on this thread showing photos of recovered hardened cast lead bullets for a good example.

While I have a collection of inperfect steel jacketed solids recovered from cape buffalo and elephants, I have determined that the flattened tails or split jackets are almost certainly the result of the round nose bullet tumbling toward the end of its journey through the game and striking heavy bone while sideways. Most recovered steel jacketed bullets are perfect but for the land engraving.

Copper flat nose solids do not chip like the hardened lead bullets and even substantial dents at the edge of the meplats do not seem to alter the bullets' penetration much, though a good size dent might make a bullet curve during penetration. The dents don't seem to make them deviate substantially until the bullet has lost substantial velocity.

Again I'll repeat: if a .458:, 500gr bullet at 2050fps is adequate and not a whole lot more, there is no indication that a similar bullet five or six hundred feet per second slower is going to be adequate as I define adequate: "capable of putting a solid bullet into the vitals from (nearly?) any angle."

And: Two similar solid bullets leave two rifles at different velocities. Both bullets impact the same for identical shots. The faster solid bullet will penetrate until it has slowed to the impact velocity of the slower bullet and then it has EXACTLY the same energy and potential to penetrate EXACTLY the same as the slower bullet which is now going EXACTLY the same speed.

Finally: Solid bullet penetration is determined largely by sectional density and energy per unit of bullet frontal area. You need a proper ratio between the two. Flat point bullets (that stay whole) penetrate better than round nose bullets. But not enough to make up for five or six hundred feet per second lower velocity.

No one has answered my question of whether any 45/70 advocates have shot cape buffalo with a 45/70, or even just shot a cape buffalo with any cartridge.

I'm especially interested in answers from those decrying the lack of experience of those of us who have shot cape buffalo, though with more powerful, proven DG rifles than a 45/70 and who, to a man (far as I can tell), think planning a cape buffalo hunt with a 45/70 is foolhardy.

JPK

BrentD,

They were brass or bronze or a copper alloy. YD mentions it elsewhere on AR. BTW, a 45/70 will penetrate, apparently reliably, a cow elephant's skull for a side brain shot. Penetration distance required = ~1 1/2'. If this is so, and it seems to be, then it would also penetrate adequately when the elephant has its head down and or is much lower than the shooter. Required penetration ~=<1'. The problem comes when the elephant is close and or higher than the shooter, where upwards of four or five feet of penetration through muscles, sinew, hard and soft bone and honeycombed bone can be required to reach the brain.

And bull elephant are a whole hell of a lot bigger than cow elephant. Their heads are proportionally even larger than their bodies since they use them for fighting and butting, unlike cows.

Similar to my take on a adequate rifle for buffalo, an adequate rifle for elephant need to be able to drive a sufficient solid bullet into the breain from (nearly?) any frontal angle, to keep yourself alive, drive a bullet into the vitals on a quartering away shot and break a hip or pelvis on a going away shot, along with enough energy to reasonably reliably knock an elephant down if you miss the brain close or at least to likely stop a charge.

JPK

Britt,

I know a similar guy on the Ft. Belknap Resservation. He prefers the .25-06, but uses head shots, as do a great many of the bison guides I know.

My example was about body penetration of bison by bullets, which is very similar to that of Cape buffalo.

JB

JPK,

I have hunted Cape buffalo and bison, and have seen many more killed than I have killed myself. Through all that I have experience on both animals with the effects of both "modern" rounds and others.

The reason I finally brought up the FACTS of Brian Pearce's experience is so that everybody who was emphatitically stating that the .45-70 cannot provide the sort of penetration required for Cape buffalo could learn something.

Evidently you chose not to read my post--or Brian's article. If you did maybe you'd learn something. But like many who post on the Campfire you prefer to go on and on about the original point of a thread without ever referencing the actual reason for it.

Before privileging us with all your wisdom, I wouild advise at least reading my synopsis of Brian's piece.

JB

JPK,
Good,thoughtful post.Perhaps your most cogent on this thread yet.We do have Brian Pearce having shot a buff with a 45/70 and we have Mule Deer's report of another I believe.There is also the post of the elephant having been taken by the 50/110,albeit with a different type of bullet than we have generally been considering.
I've been PM'd by three of these guys,only one has posted on this thread so far.For what they feel are good reasons,they have declined to post in the open.I hope they change their minds as they are far better suited ti answer you than I.Remember,I really can't speak from experience either way,and have never said otherwise,or taken a real position.I have tried to be "Mr. Interlocutor" if you please,digging for information.
One of these gentlemen has sent me a DVD,but I have not received it yet.It promisses to be interesting.

jpk,
note that his bullet was neither very heavy, has poor sectional density relative to my prefered bullets, and is not as fast as you insist that it must be. Yet, it worked on elephant. Not just deep to vitals, but "through" the elphant. It it too much for you to see that what we are suggesting for buffalo is not so unreasonable? And then there is the Biran Pearce experience that MD details.

Ah well...

Brent

You don't have to have any experience, or be much of a rocket scientist, to understand the following:

1. A .30 caliber 220 grain SOLID bullet at 2400 fps outpenetrates a 500 grain
SOLID .458 bullet 1500 fps. The rest is simply a matter of bullet construction.

2. The reason I picked 1500 fps is because another poster was crowing about that velocity with a 550 grain bullet from a 45-70.

So no need to insult me, and I won't insult you.

And, yes, I would be interested in more details about someone getting within 250 fps of a 458 Lott with a 450 Marlin. Was this with a lever action rifle? My loading manuals (yes, another thing I never did was shoot a 450 Marlin) all seem to indicate a much wider velocity difference.

I do wish I would have tried the 9.3x74 before I fell in love with the 375. I have purchased a Ruger #1 in this caliber and I kick myswlf on passing a a double 9.3x74 a couple of years back.
The problem is that we have more choices available than time. If cape buffalo were as available as whitetail we probably would have all tried a few more caliber combos.

Brent- Have you thought of hunting for buffal0 late in the season to fill out left over quota? This would help keep the cost down. Might be a little warmer. Would it be possible to set up the Sharps with two sets of barrels?

I agree with you.

But at least two posts on this thread have claimed that the 45-70 is an excellent long range cartridge. In point of fact, it's one of the worst, despite its other virtues.

Blaser guy,
what sort of money would that be? I cannot see a buffalo hunt for less than $8k and that would be hunting nothing else, and getting a hell of a deal on both airline ticket and trophy fees etc. I think $10k is more likely. But I don't really know about what you suggest.

Yes, I can switch barrels but it takes a good vice. Nothing more though. I have two barrels fitted for it now. Why do you ask?

Brent

I have shot cape buffalo for $5K on a 5 day hunt. Now I was in Africa so my airfare was not factored into this. This was a strictly buffalo hunt.
The only reason I asked about the barrel is you were saying you were worried about the barrel length of your rifle being too long and would want another rifle with a 28" barrel.

It sounds like a beautiful Classic German double rifle. I wish I owned it, and you had a better one. I'm a German gun lover and shoot drillings...always wanted a pre-war 9,3X74R double rifle.

Mule Deer has outlined Brian Pearce's article on hunting with the 45-70 in Africa. If anyone wants to read the whole thing, it was published in two parts in Rifle magazine. First part was in January, second part in March, 2004.
I'm going to throw in my 2 cents here because I've been a fan of the 45-70 for more than 45 years and currently own six starting with an original Springfield carbine, Sharps replicas, Ruger Single Shots, a Browning Highwall and a Marlin lever action.
First of all the original black powder load was used by American buffalo hunters to kill millions of our American bison. There were other cartridges available including a couple of 50 calibers but the 45-70 was a favorite. Remember that the goal of market hunters was to drop the animal where it stood so it wouldn't spook the rest of the herd. That way numerous animals were harvested at one stand. American bison are as big or bigger than cape buffalo. I'm sure this is going to start a discussion on which animal is the hardest too kill but let me assure you that an American Buffalo is no Pusey cat.
Now we can look at smokeless powder loads for this cartridge specifically for Marlin lever actions for that is the gun in question in this debate.
In the August 2007 edition of Handloader Magazine, Brian Pearce's (name sound familiar?) article on reloading the 45-70 has data going up to 43,500 CUP. Can the Marlin operate at such pressure? Sure it can. This is what the 444 is loaded at not to mention the even higher pressure for the Winchester 307 and 356 that were chambered in the rifle abet with a slightly smaller rim diameter. Also, if you look at Hodgdon's online loading data you will see that they went to 43,700 CUP in a Marlin WWG457. Brian's top loads were over 2000 FPS with 400 gr. bullets and over 1500 fps with 500 grain bullets. I see already some discussion on other treads about Brian's article and wither the Marlin will handle that pressure. This reminds me of the Sixties when Elmer Keith said he loaded his 1886 Winchesters with 53 grains of 3031 with 405 grain bullets but Lyman's handbook only went to 48 grains.
Speaking of Lyman's 45-70 loading data, I have before me Lyman's 47th Edition and if you turn to page 359 you will find that they got 2157 FPS with 60 grains of RX7, and a 405 grain bullet at only 37,500 CUP. This was with a 28 inch barrel and Ruger long throat so a rifle with a 18 or 22 inch barrel will be slightly slower. They also got 1879 FPS with a 500 grain bullet with 57 grains of H4895 at 39,000 CUP .Some are going to cry foul because at the top of the page Lyman wrote "For Ruger No. 1 and No.3 only". At these pressures a Marlin shouldn't have a problem but with any handload development START LOW AND WORK UP.
I've stated my case and all I have to say to you 45-70 detractors is give this fine cartridge a try but a word of warning. Be careful that another buffalo is not on the other side of the one your shooting at because you will probably kill it too.

Doc

This has been an interesting topic even to a non-Safari hunter when the information makes sense and/or has some basis in experience and reason.

One of the details, though, that has been repeated several times which sticks sideways is the idea that a faster bullet penetrates as well or better than the same bullet impacting a a lower speed. While that does seem obvious at the outset, there does seem to be some evidence that it isn't necessarily so. And while 1300 or 1400 may be a "magic" impact speed where the goods are best delivered - take your pick, starting at only 1500 is surely no guarantee that you will still have the ideal minimums anymore at impact. (I say this because I know many 45-70 users who parrot the idea - when shooting hard cast loads- that they don't want or need 1800 fps loads since that is above the ideal penetration speed. Well, fine, but that bullet will surely have lost quite a few fps by the time it reaches the target - unless you're within spitting distance.)

But my initial thought on speed and penetration: To simply say a faster bullet will slow to the speed of the same bullet from an inferior bullet, and the penetration thereafter will be equal is to assume that the bullet which impacts faster will still be stabile when it has slowed - which is very doubtful given the theory of physics and everything we know based on experience. It is quite logical, as stated earlier, that a faster bullet should penetrate better, but logic doesn't always follow the rules, especially when it isn't based on enough pieces of information. Some people say that, "Of course the faster one penetrates more, it's simple physics!" Well, we can say "physics" but unless we account for all the ways that energy is being converted to other forms, we can't be so sure that faster means more penetration. Experience counts here even though it doesn't provide the explanation. Of course those who might have the experience to back that up can't rely on a simplistic understanding of physics or their "proofs" are empty.

While test media proofs don't meet muster with those who demand real flesh and bone testing, no one here has yet provide any real flesh proofs. Consequently it seems clear, to me anyway, that the whole idea that more velocity equals more penetration is yet an unsupported conclusion.

Klikitarik,
You have just summed up the whole debate.I think many of us already are convinced that the 45/70 for sure,and probably the longer versions as well,can propel those 400 and 500 gr.bullets much faster than many would have given them credit for in the past,I know I have.I briefly considered taking my converted Siamese mauser to Africa,but was talked out of it,by Jorge among others.I had little trouble pushing 405 gr, jacketed flat points out of it at over 1900 ft. per second twenty five years ago.No signs of excess pressure I could see.
I am more concerned about the construction of the particular bullets I used than whether or not I could drive bullets of that weight fast enough and do it safely.Of course,this being twenty five years later,we have better bullet choices as well as better powder choices than I had then.
The question now is,can certain bullets of enough weight (apparently around 540 gr)and the right shape and construction,be driven fast enough to be effective against cape buffalo,and under what circumstances.What velocity is truly optimal,and could it stop a charge if necessary ?

Steve,

I have never been interested enough in what a 500 plus grain hardcast could do out of a 45-70 to fool with them. I have, however, played with the 500 softs but, even in the strong Ruger #1, I haven't gotten enough speed to get the test media expansion I'd like to see for use on game.

I can in no way speak for what might stop a charge on a Cape bull. I do know that people tend to be much more impressed by the absolute power of their weapons based on the noise and recoil, as well as the size of the cartridge, bore size, etc. What I do know about animals that don't give up easily is that none of those things seem to matter a whit. Then, only where the hole(s) are counts - and, of course, long holes give you better odds of getting some proper "where."

We're pretty much on the same page,which is why I referenced the 6.5s in general and my experience in particular.Those were long,heavy for caliber bullets moving along at what most might consider rather sedate velocities.Yet they were (and are) very effective.
It always surprises me how many 6.5 proponents today dote on those 120-129-140 gr. bullets.It's the same hotrod mentality that everyone else is caught up in with all the modern hotrod cartridges.Those old Carcanos and Mannlicher Schoenhuare (sp) cartridges were amazingly effective with 160 gr.rn bullets.

While this would certainly prove me to be a fool, it would prove nothing about the 45-70 since that stunt has already been performed a few times.

The 45-70 pre-dated the 450 NE, 450 No 2, 500/465, 500 NE, 577 NE and 600 NE. I makes a guy wonder why the British went to so much trouble to produce double rifles in powerful cartridges when the 45-70 was already available.

Klikitarik,
I don't know if 1300, 1400, 1500, or 29,051 fps will penetrate further. Frankly, I don't really care. What I do know is that the slow bullets will penetrate sufficiently. I'll leave all the other arguments to the cognoscenti.

JPK, your fragmented "hard cast" bullets are probably just built wrong. That is, the alloy is wrong, the treatment is wrong, the velocity is wrong. Just a guess on my part, but there is a WHOLE lot more to bullets than just hardness. Hardness w/o brittleness. Very doable - if you care to learn. the term "hard cast" is pretty useless in my opinion. HOW it is "hard" is important. BTW, I swage most of mine anyway

And then of course, there are soft bullets, not necessarily expandible to a great degree but malleable. I've shot a lot of critters with pure lead for instance, and it never fragments. I might consider it for cape buffalo, but probably not. In any event, there are lots of things to learn about lead - again, if you care to learn. I don't know all of it, or even a lot of it, but I do know enough to have a pretty good idea of what I don't know.

Brent

Klikitarik,

I have real, in the flesh, experience that faster solid bullets produce deeper penetration in animals. I have repeated it in my posts several times. But here you go: A 500gr solid at 2050fps penetrates less than the same 500gr solid at 2135fps in every animal medium that I have tried, and that includes elephant brian shots and the different mediums needed to penetrate to the brain, elephant body shots in the chest, buffalo body shots. Somewhere I have a log of penetration and could give you penetration measurements for both, but it is packed in preparation for a move.

The often quoted, but irrelevant, newsprint test that that indicate that a slower flat nose solid penetrates more than a faster round nose solid are the results of the way the newsprint tears when wet. Read Reflex264's post here on this topic. I think it points out, correctly, that the results are the opposite if the newsprint is dry. Some believe that it is the wet media's ability to tranfer greater energy because of the presence of the water. Some believe that its the flat front of the slower bullet.

I believe that it is both. But one thing is sure, the faster bullet tears an ever increasing in diameter and length wad of wet newsprint as it penetrates while the slower flat nose does not. So the faster ever increasing paper and bullet projectile of the faster projectile eats penetration.

Dry newsprint does not tear like this so the ever increasing wad does not exist to hinder the faster bullet.

Flesh has water and tears, but not in plugs like wet newsprint. This is why the newsprint test are irrelevant and why, in the real world, faster similar bullets penetrate nore in flesh. Sectional density and energy per unit of bullet frontal area largely determine solid bullet penetration, and flat point bullets penetrate further. There is no magic in a slow bullet.

JPK

Muledeer,

Why don't you knock off the backhand personal attack. Try asking instead of accusing; I read your post. I also read Pearce's article.

I asked if any one of the 45/70 advocates had shot any cape buffalo. You answer indicates that you have; that makes a total of one, one of (?). Did you do it with a 45/70? You remain silent on this portion of the question. Have you witnessed others do it?

The posts I have made, both before and after, fully adress both your post and Pearce's article.

I don't think any individual who posts here believes that a 45/70 won't kill a cape buffalo, or even, with some bullets and loadings, fully penetrate on broadside shots, and surely I don't.
That does not come close to making it an adequate cape buffalo cartridge.

But then you should know this.

JPK

Klikitarik,
I don't know if 1300, 1400, 1500, or 29,051 fps will penetrate further. Frankly, I don't really care. What I do know is that the slow bullets will penetrate sufficiently (I like two holes, one in, one out). I'll leave all the other arguments to the cognoscenti.

JPK, your fragmented "hard cast" bullets are probably just built wrong. That is, the alloy is wrong, the treatment is wrong, the velocity is wrong. Just a guess on my part, but there is a WHOLE lot more to bullets than just hardness. Hardness w/o brittleness. Very doable - if you care to learn. the term "hard cast" is pretty useless in my opinion, and invented by handgunners who (generally) know nothing about hunting bullets. HOW it is "hard" is important. BTW, I swage most of mine anyway

And then of course, there are soft bullets, not necessarily expandible to a great degree but malleable. I've shot a lot of critters with pure lead for instance, and it never fragments. I might consider it for cape buffalo, but probably not. In any event, there are lots of things to learn about lead - again, if you care to learn. I don't know all of it, or even a lot of it, but I do know enough to have a pretty good idea of what I don't know.

And jpk, not that MD needs defending, but you've been mighty handy with the backhands yourself. Quit with calling the kettle black.

Brent

Then why is it still so onerous to you? How much data does it take? Me thinks infinite, 'cuz you ain't gonna change your mind. It ain't about data, it's about attitude.




Then one could say this about nearly every single cartridge out thre. Why the .458 lott when there was the Watts (or the modern .458 WMag for that matter. In fact, why 95% of the cartridges that exist today? Almost everyone of them has something that is the near equivalent that preceeds it and nearly everyone of them has another cartridge that is just a little more better than it is.

That is sort of a "fool's" question, if you think about it (for a nanosecond)....

Brent

BrentD,

Here is the relevant portion of YD's post on AR:

"We discovered that the first shot was just forward of her brain by a millimeter according to the PH and also narrowly missed her spine on the quartering shot but exited the elephant after penetrating over 4 feet through the skull and neck. Apparently, it had shocked her badly and she was unable to regain her footing. In fact, upon showing the video to Myles McCallum (partner of Buzz and Charles Helm�s PH on his trip), Myles immediately assumed it was a fatal brain shot. One of the shoulder shots also exited and the other shots were difficult to track but had over 4 feet of penetration as well. The finishing shot was the only bullet that we recovered and it fell out of her neck while removing the head. As you can see the solid has no damage and could be reloaded. Hats off to Kelye for a very fine bullet. Mushi."

A couple of comments:

You can't miss just in front of the brain and be anywhere near the spine. The spine and spinal column originate at the lower rear of the skull. The brain is about a foot in length and shaped halfway between a loaf of bread and a football.

I wasn't there to see the position of the elephant and it head and neck relationship, but there isn't anywhere on a tuskless cow where a quartering side brain shot leaves four feet of elephant behind the impact point, which is visible on the side of the head. I don't think you could get four feet if you measure around the curve, but maybe. Using phythagorean math that would lead to maybe 2.8' of penetration if the four feet figure came from an actual tape measure around the curve. No penetration of the sinewy trunk or the hard bones in the front. But maybe low enough to have had to penetrate hard bone of the zygomatic arch.

The shot to the back of the head should be able to exit through the bottom of the head, at least on a cow. It is only a couple of feet to penetrate. Likely the bullet struck the spine; it should still have penetrated the depth of the neck. My flat points will penetrate through the shoulders and spine and exit on a broadside shot, for example. I use soft points for back of the head insurance shots.

The bullet whole on the shoulder, through the ear, leaves me wondering where the other is. I would question how far that bullet penetrated the shoulder bones, if at all, if the entry hole is right below the hole in the ear, but then I wasn't there.

The other head shot entry wound is visible well down the trunk. Without an ax, a willing tracker and time or a chainsaw, there is no way to track that bullet in the skull.

I have seen the crocodile farm recover three of my elephants and they do not allow for much bullet digging time. I wonder if they could have come up with the other two if they had more time. Seems like they had the interest.

The bullet stood the test very well. I wonder if the recovered bullet struck the spine. I also wonder if the recovered bullet isn't the one from the shot well down the trunk. Only good bullet digging could have told us that answer.

It seems that copper or brass or bronze mono metal, flat point, solid bullets ought to weigh 10% or so less than traditional bullet weight for the NE and more modern 458 cartridges. Looking at the 50 Alaskan as shot, as opposed to a 500NE, you are looking at 570gr bullets vs. 10% less for a copper, etc, mono or about 510grs at 2150 or so. Your observation that the bullet is light is correct, even for mono metal solids. Velocity isn't too bad at 1900fps.

So the rifle, bullet, load combo killed a tuskless elephant. 460gr 50 cal at 1900fps with a reasonably wide flat point. But there are some signs that the round is lacking adequacy and some that point to its being adequate for that job. I think it is inadequate for a bull elephant since it shows signs of inadequacy on a tuskless cow elephant and everything is bigger and thicker and deeper and longer and stronger on a bull. Plus an adequate elephant rifle has to be able to reach the vitals on rear quartering shots and break the hip joint or pelvis.

My thought for what they're worth.

JPK

BrentD,

I have not attacked anyone personally. This, from Muledeer and directed at me, is a [bleep], sarcastic, personal attack:
"Evidently you chose not to read my post--or Brian's article. If you did maybe you'd learn something. But like many who post on the Campfire you prefer to go on and on about the original point of a thread without ever referencing the actual reason for it.

Before privileging us with all your wisdom, I wouild advise at least reading my synopsis of Brian's piece."

Worse, he is off target and making foolish and incorrect assumptions.

But if my posts in response to your post have offended you, that was in no way my intention and I would owe you my appology.

The hard cast that have been brittle are all commercial bullets so far as I know. The ones in Reflex264's post are Craters by JBY, best I can make out his id, given in his post on page four of this thread or so.

If you can make one both non expandable and able to penetrate a buff's boss, spine, hips etc, without chipping and deforming at enough velocity to ensure penetration from (nearly?) any angle you may be on to something.

Before you conclude that a rifle/bullet/sectional density/velocity/energy combo that differs so greatly, downward, from a 458wm shooting 500gr solids at 2050 or even a 480gr solid at 2000 (representative of some slow loading of the 450 NE's) go shoot a bison from the rear and see if your bullet makes it to the heart. If it does, you may have found yourself an adequate cape buffalo rifle and bullet, load combo. Then go and see how it works on the real thing. If it doesn't make the trip to the heart, it isn't up to the task. Feel free to substitute real ballistic gelatin for the bison. Try for four feet, not enough really but close enough to "prequalify" your combo, imo.

JPK

[quote=IndyCA35
You don't have to have any experience, or be much of a rocket scientist, to understand the following:

1. A .30 caliber 220 grain SOLID bullet at 2400 fps outpenetrates a 500 grain
SOLID .458 bullet 1500 fps. The rest is simply a matter of bullet construction. [/quote]


Have you actualy tried this and know it to be fact are or you speculating.... I have seen on the same day and in the same media a 420 grain Flat point out of a 475 linebaugh revolver at 1384 FPS out penetrate a 410 grain round nose solid at 2380+ FPS out of a 416 Rigby.... The 416 certainly had the most sectional density.............

And the media was wet newsprint? Or the only relevant media, game?

JPK

jpk, I read your "synopsis" and I think MD was right. He is also neither off target nor being silly.

As for tempered bullets, I'm not "on to something" they are old news - often ignored by folks that know they know everything about lead bullet shooting. Been around for a couple centuries.

Brent

BrentD,

Yes MD was off target and being foolish since his accusation is unfounded. And his post was [bleep] to boot.

I'm sure that your assertion that tempered bullets that aren't brittle have been around for a long time is true, but then, how come so many hard cast bullets show so much damage when they are recovered? Find a formula that works at a velocity that will give the penetration needed while maintaining bullet integrity and you will be on to something.

I never claimed a whole lot of experience shooting cast bullets, just experience shooting cape buffalo and elephants too, with round nose steel jacketed bullets at two different velocities and also with flat point solids too. Then going to the trouble to dig for those that failed to exit and the trouble to measure penetration.

JPK

Because lots of folks think they know everything about "hard cast" bullets and are too lazy to do their homework.




Then by your own admissions you don't really know what you are talking about.

Brent

Brent,

If you want to shoot a buffalo or anything else with a 45-70, go ahead and do so. No one is stopping you.

But please do not ask us to declare it to be the right tool for the job. Probably more elephants have been killed with the 7.62 x 39 than any other caliber (i.e., poachers with AK47s), but it's still a poor choice for elephant hunting.

How does it matter if it's wet News paper or ballistic gelitin it is still the same media on the same day for both............ I have seen a 475 revolver out penetrate a 338 win mag and a 375 H&H on Large Bull Moose............

Here's a recent thread about rifles used by the Professional Hunters. There's exactly one mention of a 45-70. That tells me something...

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...lat/Number/1333928/page/7/nt/all/fpart/1

It comes down to this from what I gather on this subject.
1) It does work.
2) passion for and against its general use is strong on both sides.
3) When it comes down to spending your money on a hunt for a Dangerous Game buffalo hunt paying DG daily rates and trophy fees most have made the choice to useing a "traditional african cartridge".

For me it doesn't matter what will work, I have to be comfortable using the cartridge/rifle combo. It does not matter what the paper ballistics say will work or will not work. You see it has to be pretty convincing for me to pack it into the gun case on they way to Africa. I have to have confidence in it. My actions spell it out for me. I will not entertain recomending something I myself would not use. When it comes to DG hunting it is quite simple, what are you willing to put your life on the line for? What shot presentations are you willing to pass on after spending good money to hunt?
I am cut out to use what works for me. I am not that curious I guess.
Your actions say it all.

JPK--I have laid off this discussion for a while to let all the yelling and screaming die down. A couple of things. If Indy thinks three feet of penetration on a wildebeast is noteworthy and laudable, he is right on one of two points. It is noteworthy becaust it is LAUGHABLE. While we are talking about Indy, I wonder if he would be willing to let me or some of the other guys I know shoot at him from 1000 yards with our Sharps in 45-70?

Your statement that if one can penetrate from the rear end of an American bison to his heart, then he has a cartridge that may be adequate for dangerous game and Cape Buffalo has a lot of merit. If we take that as an acceptable benchmark, then the 45-70 is beyond any doubt capable.

Three years ago, a gentleman of my acquaitance shot througth a 2200 pound bison from the right rear flank through its left shoulder blade, breaking the shoulder. The bison turned to face him, and he shot it just inboard of the same left shoulder. The 540 grain bullet traversed the bull lenghtwise and was recovered from under the base of the tail. The bison collapsed at the second shot. The distance was 96 yards. The load was 61 grains of Goex Cartridge for a velocity of 1100 fps pushing a Saeco 745 cast bullet at 540 grains. The impact velocity was in the neighborhood of 1050 fps.

It is easy to get 1250 to 1285 fps from a 540 grain bullet from a 45-70 using Goex Express 3f black powder. My 45-110 does its work at 1335 to 1380 with bullets weighing from 511 to 540 grains. I can get more with black powder, but do not want or need it. These bullets do not need to be driven over 1400 fps to completely penetrate a buffalo, Cape or otherwise.

BrentD is trying to tell you something if you will listen. Those of us that KNOW HOW to cast good bullets cast a bullet that is TOUGH, not brittle. Almost all of the current hard cast bullets use antimony as a hardening agent, and antimony delivers hardness AND a hefty dose of brittle. These bullets fragment and come apart on impact. Ours don't. The original Sharps bullets did not fragment, either.

Today's bullets are for the most part, brittle. Anything that is .458 diameter should weigh a MINIMUM of 500 grains. You will be shocked at the penetration difference between a 500 grain bullet and one that weighs 520 or 540. The British Express bullets were and are TOO LIGHT. 480 grains is TOO LIGHT. I have recovered 480 grain flat nosed cast bullets from deer and hogs, for heavens sake. I have NEVER recovered one of my 500 to 540 grain round nosed bullets from any animal, either in North America or Africa. The Brits were more concerned with regulating the barrels on their double rifles, and gave up on heavy bullets simply because the heavier bullets make the regulation process exponentially more tedious, and the loading of the cartridges becomes infinitely more tedious when bullets in this weight range are used.

You are right about needing sectional density and a given amount of force for the surface area of the bullet for optimum penetration. You get this with a .458 diameter 520 to 540 grain bullet EVERY TIME. You get it most of the time with a 500 grainer. The 458 Win Mag would work a lot better with another 20 to 40 grains of weight in the bullet.

A ROUND NOSE concentrates the available force behind the bullet into a small area. A flat nose spreads the amount of surface area, thus DILUTING THE AVAILABLE FORCE BEHIND THE BULLET. A round nose bullet that retains its shape will out penetrate a flat nosed bullet because of this concentration of force. It is THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THE PRINCIPLE THAT MAKES SNOWSHOES WORK. A spitzer would penetrate even better, but it will not retain its shape and will tumble, thus reducing penetration. It also has a hypodermic needle effect, and does not transmit shock as does the flat nosed bullet. The round nosed bullet transmits plenty of shock, and gets the job done.

I hope you get the opportunity to see the DVD of my Sharps in action in South Africa. Stay tuned.

Sorry, but you got the physics wrong. First of all, the overwhelming majority of field data shows that flat nose bullets outpenetrate round nose bullets of similar weight and velocity. As to the physics, here is a link:

http://www.grosswildjagd.de/penetrat.htm

The old saw is "Figures don't lie, but you can lie with figures". I'll stick with the snowshoe analogy. Snowshoes work in the real world, and so do round nosed properly cast bullets.

Oh Dan, you walked right around that one didn't you?

That's okay if you can't find an answer. It tells me what you're working with.

And, I don't believe that AKs are 7.62x39s. Pesky detail but I believe they are 308s. I don't shoot one so I might be wrong. I do have an acquaintence that shot quite a few cape buff with one on a cull job.

Brent

Ak-47's are 7.63X39,not 308's.......

well what do you know?

learn something every day

Brent

Actually, a 7.62X39 is .310-.312 and are not .308's. Just measure a barrel(AK-47 or SKS, no commercial American barrels.)

Brent,

The 7.62x39 was the standard Soviet cartridge for a long time. Used in the SKS and AK-47 since at least the 1950s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62x39

-Bob F.

JPK,

If you had indeed read Brian Pearce's article, you'd know that one of his bullets pentrated not just one but two buffalo (bull and cow), through the shoulders, and another penetrated a big bull lengthwise, through the rump up to the brisket. I didn't see anywhere in any of your posts where you acknowledged either example of .45-70 penetration, so logically assumed you had not read the post.

If you directly addressed those points in any one of your posts, and I missed it, then I apologize. But I read your posts several times and....

I have not hunted Cape buffalo with a .45-70. However, my partner on a 2003 hunt in Botswana hunted them with a .50-110 using 475-grain hard-cast bullets at 1500 fps, a load is certainly in the same range. I was not along when he killed his buffalo, but was when it was skinned and butchered, and got to hear the whole tale from the PH I(and see it, as it was videoed). In general the bullets went until they were stopped by the hide on the far side, at whatever angle. They did not break up, and only mushroomed a little bit if they hit bone. AT least one was a "raking" shot.

If only penetrating to the offside hide is inadequate buffalo performance, then there are a great many modern buffalo cartridge/bullet combinations that are indeed inadequate. There oughta be a law!

Brian's results, with a jacketed solid at a mere 1800 fps, rival that of many modern rifles and cutting-edge bullets. Please tell me where you ackknowledged where he shot through two buffalo with one bullet (both through the shoulders) and a big bull lengthwise. Then I will quit being so [bleep].

JB

I've been watching this unfold and laughing myself silly.
How long are you guys gonna keep flogging this dead ....buffalo.

The only thing I can add is "My Mum can beat the snot out of your Mum!"

With apologies to African Hunter magazine.

SOS

Reminds me of a signature a guy used to use back in ye olde days of the newsgroups. It was something like this:

"The Internet is a place where men with clubs in their hands stand around a crater in the ground where, long ago, a dead horse used to lie"...

Something like that.

Carry on!

-jeff

hmm, a little lull in the action and the fans in the stands grow restless. How charming...

:-)

-jeff

Savuti and Jeff
Some of us are actually learning a few things here.If you have nothing positive to add,why rain on someone else's parade ?
Surly you can find another thread that holds some interest for you.

Again, your example doesn't really answer the question since you have no "slow" example. (Your's are not even 100 fps apart, identical for all practical purposes!)

That said though, one of the problems with live flesh tests is the fact that it takes enormous quantities of tests to get around the many variables. Surely newsprint and other things in various forms can provide some useful knowledge when it comes to bullet performance. By better controlling the variables one tests for, it is possible to actually learn how those variables affect things. (Even Nosler, a company with some repute in bullet making, has acknowledged the use of newsprint for testing their designs.)

I really don't know if there are any magic speeds where bullets penetrate better or if one can simply graph the direct correlation of penetration and speed so I don't care which side is "right." I do know there seems to be evidence to support the slow bullet idea, and, you're correct, the tests are based on wet newsprint. (Would a dead walrus test count? They are considerably bigger than any buff and, I would venture, have even thicker hides. But, aack aack, gag!)

I do like the fact that one can use certain common materials (like newsprint) and create tests that provide some useful information before hunting with a given projectile. Those tests can be fairly easily repeated by anyone anywhere which is one of the things that is useful from standardized or scientific standpoint. While live flesh tests are great, even the most objective person doesn't always see and recognize what has happened when looking for and at bullet tracks. Of course, after the fact, dead is dead and there are a lot of ways to get there, if some admittedly better than others.

Here's some gasoline,
Hard cast bullets, low antimony (this causes the shattering when too high), heat treated, in calibers above 40, with a BHN of 22 will begin to expand at 1,900-2,000 fps depending on the size of the meplat. That size of meplat also depends on how deep a bullet penetrates. I don't have critters here big enough to stop them in Iowa. The expansion/penetration tests were done with (GASP) wet newsprint, 1/2 in heat treated steel plate and cement. I will tell you that I can tell very little difference in penetration on these mediums between a 416 Rigby with solids, a 375 H&H with solids (a poor buff round?), and properly heat treated lead alloys in the above velocity window.
To those who pooh the velocity of lead bullets, and velocity is the holy grail to penetration, why not shoot the 458's out of a Weatherby? If you do you will notice the bullet chipping, deforming etc. found in the lead alloys over their threshold. Ever shoot these rounds in water? I'm no buff shooter but I'd put a 500 gr 45/70 (1300fps) up against a 500 458 at 2150 in a water test (sorry, I'm timid).
The final test would be a 1500 lb. steer ( big enough, tough enough, and something a non buff killer could afford?) facing you and ass end him with a 45/70 and a measly cast bullet. I'm sure the chances of getting hit are about as likely as being hammered by a buff?
In all seriousness, Brian Pearce's articles have been about "putting his money where his mouth is" as to the confidence he has in the 45/70.
MD, any "whale tests" from 458 Win and his 505 (510) Gibbs cast load? I recall him testing on a whale carcass?
After all Brian Pearce, MD, and Dave Scovill know nothing, see nothing, and its not like its their job or anything.
Nate Hoffmeier

Nate - where the heck in Iowa are you? You must be a neighbor somewhere near by. I'm, in Story City more or less.

BTW, there is a guy on the AR Africa forum that is trying to get rid of a 1700# Angus bull that tossed him one too many times. Your's for the shooting (in TX I think). Just a little bigger than the average cape buffalo...

Also, don't most DG hunters use softs in their MegaDG rifles these days?
Brent

Brent, I'm in Polk City. How's the Norsemen doin'!
DG hunters seem more confused than us deer shooters as to what works. I always thought if you hit vitals/break bone and hit vitals you could drop anything, as long as the bullet was up to it!?

Doin' fine but a shortage of lutefisk is giving us fits and making us restless...

I don't now anything that will live very with an extra 1/2" hole punched through it.

Brent

Wonder if JB has had any lute? Us krauts vil sticken tu da biere!
Evidedently its not the half inch hole, its a 400 fps faster RN half inch hole!

now i know your freaking nuts.............im 1/2 Norwegian and cant stand that crap

Brent and Nate - checking in from Belle Plaine. I am a misplaced Kraut who wound up growing up around the Swedes in Albert City. In my opinion, there is no way there could ever be a shortage of lutefisk. Best, John

A German will eat damn near anything. Gramps loved hog brains, fried. Buff brains on the menu? Oh, no Mad Buff disease?

rattler: with lutefisk, being 1/2 just don't cut it .pak

lol my grandmother would make it for my grandfather on occasion.......she couldnt stand it either

Old Saying...

"A German won't eat what a German doesn't know." My Grandad Stiegelmeier was a prime example. They sure knew some vile eats, however.

Nate, could you explain your heat treating in more detail and explain how heat treating interacts with alloy (I believe that some antimony is needed but not much for heat treating).

I know that I don't know much about this subject, and I would like to learn more. A lot of folks here don't even know that they don't know.

I'd also be interested to know where you picked up your knowledge of heat treating. Is there a good reference to recommend?

Brent

Brent, I don't want to hijack the post (any more!), so I'll PM you the info.

Nate, it's not a hijack at all, I am pretty sure Steve1 will want to know, and Sharpsguy = if he doesn't already, and maybe others.
Brent

Sorry, you have permission to use anything I PM'd. Not really private, just alot of stuff!@ More if you want it.

Klikitarak,

you post:
"Again, your example doesn't really answer the question since you have no "slow" example. (Your's are not even 100 fps apart, identical for all practical purposes!)"

What you say might seem to be the case, but it is not. A 500gr bullet at 2050 will do the job, but it is clearly not too far from the minimum for round nose steel solids. History says 2000fps is at or below minimum, my observation of performance and penetration at 2050fps does not contradict this. Preformance and penetration at 2135fps is very improved. The difference is night and day, visible at impact and obvious with a tape measure. My take is that it isn't the mere 100fps +/- from 2050fps, it is the 100fps increase from the near minimum of 2050fps, or ~ 150% over the minimum.

BTW, if you were talking about the difference in, say, a 375H&H at 2550fps and 2450fps, I would agree, no real difference that could be observed. But like I said, the differnce in striking effect and penetration is very noticable. One is subjective, one is objective and they correlate.

I've got to go to bed so I'll reply to the rest later.

JPK

Muledeer,

I recall the shooting through the buff into another... I do not recall the "end to end" portion of Pearce's article. Perhaps I blew it off as wishful thinking or literary liscense or was interupted or whatever. Nevertheless, I do not recall it.

Whatever the article says, I do not believe one instance proves a point. But it is worth considering. I can't find the article to reread, but your synopsis of the article and other post have me thinking.

I need to hit the hay, but you and all should stay tuned. I have an idea that will put oposing theories to the test and, if not decide the issue, go a long way to coroborating one side or the other's arguement.

JPK

I would not be at all surprised to find out that both sides have validity.Wouldn't be the first time we found out that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

BrentD--I would like to take a crack at that 1700 pound bull with my 45-70 and a paper patched bullet. Can you PM me some way to find the site? Thanks.

SG,
the thread is at http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1411043/m/443101107

Note, he wants $1k for the pleasure....

Brent

Sorry, Brent. I PM'd some tidbits to you, then saw your post. I'll try to address any questions tonight if anyone's interested. Didn't have time to type it all last night again! I suck at typing! FWIW to all: Ross Seyfried (four letter word?) has shot buffs, seen buffs shot, with lead, jacketed solids, many of the big nitros, pistols, even the 4 bore. If anyone is interested Handloader has an older article called "Handguns,Power, and the Theory of Relativity" by Ross, who at one time was all about big recoil, high velocity, loud racket, until he started shooting and finishing off buffs with a 45 Colt! Which he stated he would "not hesitate using in a fight"! Place proper bullet in the right place!
Nate

BrentD--Thanks for the link. For 1k I can put a bison in the freezer. I'm set to do that in the first week in December.

I took a look at the thread, and he had posted a picture of the animal taken in Feb. If it goes 1650 to 1700 now, it would have to have grown A LOT since the picture was taken.

Greetings from an old man who is a newbie regarding bigbores or African hunting and thanks for being here:

Forgive me please if my question reveals my ignorance and my lack of experience:

I, at 67 years of age, in just a recent month or two purchased (1) a CZ 375 H&H, American brown laminate stock and put a leupy 2-7 in QD rings on it, (2) a vintage (stud, unfortunately, in forearm) Ruger Magnum (RSM) 416 Rigby and will put a leupy 1-4 on it w-QD rings, and, (3) a Marlin 45-70 Guide Gun on which I put a Ghost Ring peep sight.

In estimating the merit of each of these calibers in these rifles , irrespective now of the legality of any, which I admit must be factored into any conclusion, should any consideration be at all given to the,comparative, or lack of it "handiness" of each?

Believe me, with my age no doubt showing on my lack of muscularity, and probably my inexperience too, the Guidegun seems much , much lighter and usable in conditions as running after and posturing for follow-up shots(or running from )an animal bent on revenge than the heavier, longer, more cumbersome rifles in my modest collection.

Given that "handiness," does the GG increase in desirability for use related the topic of this thread or not?

I also wonder why if a single shot in 458 Mag , or in one of the more ancient calibers, or even a double rifle with two shots , may be desirable, then a why souped up 45-70 with 5 cartridges and with proper bullets would be thought less efficient. I have read and somewhat understood the issue of sectional density.

You will find me too aware of my own lack of knowledge and experience to mount much of an argument.

Respectfully,

Bill

To All,

Here is my idea of testing each side of the arguement in this thread.

Our 45/70 proponents seem to be in three camps:

45/70 #1, hard cast flat nose bullets at some velocity around 1500fps with bullet weight around 500grs or so.

45/70 #2, round nose tempured cast bullets at greater weights ~ 540grs at velocity around 1300fps.

45/70 #3, Brian Pearce's formula of a flat nose Steel? or otherwise encapsulated bullet of 400grs at 1800? fps.

And the 45/70 doubters, all in one camp regarding modern cartridges. To be represented by the 458wm shooting 500gr Woodleighs at 2130fps, 450gr North Fork flat nose solids at 2190fps and North Fork 450gr cup point "solids" at 2190fps.

The 45/70 proponents do not seem to be in a position to actually test their theories regarding the suitability of the 45/70 for cape buffalo, though they cite a few examples available of cape buffalo being cleanly and efficiently taken with the cartridge and other examples that point to the possiblity that the 45/70 is adequate for the task.

The modern DG rifle camp side has many members who have actually killed cape buffalo with modern DG rifles, often more than a couple.

My next trip to Africa is probably +/- one year away.

I volunteer to take five or so of each bullet type represented in the 45/70 camp, loaded in 458wm cases but at their respective favored velocities, and shoot them into dead cape buffalo.

I propose a front on shot, a stern shot, a broadside shoulder shot and a raking going away shot for each bullet, at least to the extent that the dead cape buffalo cooperate by ending in a suitable position, or being reasonable movable to a suitable position for each shot angle.

I will do the same for my favorite loads if possible, though I know what they will do from previous experience and testing on dead animals followed by bullet digging.

If tests reveal that penetration is sufficient, I might even shoot a live buff with one of the loads.

I would ask that the three segments of the 45/70 camp supply me with their choice of bullets and with the velocity that they would like to see them shot at. I think I'd need about 40 bullets of each type to cover load development and sight in.

I'll gladly pay for the bullets if they are commercially available, or for the material required to make them if they are not - just so that no one ascribes impure motive to my request for 120 bullets.

If I run short of cape buffalo for the test I will try them in elephant to the extent possible.

With the help of some motivated trackers and the curiosity of the PH's I hunt with, I'm sure that we can do some good bullet digging and photograph the process and results. I'll post the photos and the notes of the results on my return.

Anyone game?

JPK

BTW,

If anyone expresses an interest, I'll post photos of some of the buff that I have killed where you can see an entrance wound and I can detail where the bullet was found or where it exited so that you can see or visualize the penetration of the 458wm at 2050fps or 2130fps.

JPK

JPK,

That sure seems like a heck of an offer.

The only thing I can see "wrong" there, and I don't have a dog in the fight as it's unlikely I will EVER hunt Africa, is that I would think there is a huge difference between hitting a "slack" dead buff, versus one with full muscle tone/tension. I mean imagine the difference between shooting yourself in the thigh with a pellet pistol, with you thigh muscle fully flexed and hard as a rock versus completly slack and relaxed...

Maybe that's a non-issue; I don't know.

-jeff

along the lines of Allen's post on the other thread and a short discussion via pm with another member(we didnt reach an agreement i dont believe though), i dont view the 45-70 as ideal for dangerous game hunting however if the 375H&H is adequate than a properly loaded 45-70 is also. but as i also told the other member via pm that ive been around sufficient numbers of pissed off bovines of the domestic variety that if it were my hide, i would wish for something bigger than either.......so when it comes down to it, if hunting one with a 375H&H isnt a stunt than using a properly loaded 45-70 isnt either.............and if someone screams sectional density to me, please explain to me the 470 Nitro, same weight bullet as the 458 Win, going the same speed but is a bigger diameter therefor less sectional density.....sectional density by itself is a BS arguement......

JPK,

It does ineed sound like an interesting proposal. I am of not particular "camp" in all of this, just after what might possibly be true. In fact, I would be willing to publish the results of your experiment in SUCCESSFUL HUNTER. There should be no difficulty in obtaining the bullets needed in that case.

Brian's article was a 2-parter, and appeared in the January and March issues of RIFLE magazine. Only the second part deals with shooting buffalo, but both are necessary for the full perspective of loads, animals shot before the buffalo, etc.

If you are really intersted PM me.

JB

jpk,
I will be glad to supply you with various bullets. But not 40 of each. What the hell do you need 40 for to shoot a dead buffalo from point blank? 5 ought to do. They take more than a little while to make too.

BTW, have you EVER loaded and shot paperpatched bullets and black powder? If you're going to do this with my bullets, you going to have to learn. - it's not like it's hard to do though.

Brent

hence the 40 bullet request????

BrentD--I will send him 20 of the 457125 Lyman grease groove bullets at 20-1 and 20 at at 30-1. All lubed and sized .458 and ready to go. However, in the sense and spirit of fairness, he needs to agree to drive them between 1250 fps and 1350 fps. A little slower, maybe, but NOT faster.

If he gets one of the hardness levels shooting to suit him in his rifle, the other should shoot within an inch of it.

I think if MD consults Brian and Dave he will get what he wants for bllets, and they both know what their doing. I believe he will be surprised. Most flat nosed jacketed solids are knock offs of LBT designs anyway, because they work!
Thanks JPK for being emperical, at least giving the idea a try!

To all,

A couple of things,

While I have wondered if penetration of solids is affected by the live vs fresh dead issue, nothing that I have found points to a difference in penetration. So far as penetration in live aware game vs unaware game, no noted differences in penetration, only in percieved impact or "knock-down" effect.

In my book, it isn't only sectional density, it is velocity and energy per unit of bullet frontal area. The difference in the sectional density of the 470NE and 458wm or Lott or ? 500gr bullets will lead to less penetration, on average, for the the 470. But the difference between the SD of the two isn't much and the velocities of the two close - so long as the 458wm is loaded reasonably. Flat nose bullets out penetrate round nose bullets at 458wm and 470NE velocities. Hisorically, the 470 was noted by some for too many cases of deviation from straight line penetration. John Taylor attributes this to too "pointy" and not hemisherical bullet shape.

MD, I read both parts, just do not recall any end to end shots. If you want to publish the results, great. The more people who read about the field tests the better, no matter what the results!

I will shoot the bullets at the velocities specified by those who supply them. I asked for 40 per example because that is typically how many bullets I go through before I am satisfied that I've found a sweet spot for the bullet/powder/rifle - or not. If you choose to supply less that is fine, so long as there are enough to do both load development and then test in buff. But that would probably rule out any chance that that bullet gets used on a live buff.

My 458wm rifle of choice is a double rifle and finding loads that shoot the same in both barrels can be trouble, let alone get the barrels shooting together. If a buddy comes with me, I will ask him to take my 458 Lott for testing the different bullets. That would make shooting to POA an easier hurdle.

I have never loaded paper patch bullets, but I'm willing to learn. I have read about it.

JPK

BTW,

I'm not going to shoot black powder, just find a "smokeless for black" load of powder.

Brent, I hunt with a couple of black powder guns. One you would hate, one you might tolerate. But they are muzzleloaders for our deer season.

JPK

JPK,

Anything inside quotation marks is from from Brian Pearce's article. The rest are my synopsis:

After the first broadside shot, 1/3 of the way up through both shoulders (the shot that also killed the cow, going through both her shoulders): "Just as predicted, the bull whirled and ran nearly straight away from us. I had been instructed (and had agreed with this) that as long as the buffalo was on his feet to just keep firing. I instantly levered the Marlin and fired again. Dust flew from the bull and he humped slightly, then turned 90 degrees to the right, while I levered another cartridge into the chamber and fired again. The only part of him visible for this third shot was the hindquarters (with the rest of him going into the brush), and I figured that if we had to follow him, more holes would be better! Jonathan [the PH] gasped as he looked through his binocular and stated, 'There's a cow down and the bull is too."

Here we skip forward a few paragraphs:

"The second shot caught the bull in the rump (as he was going almost directly away from us), penetrating the full length of the body through the stomach matter, severed the top of the heart and was found in the brisket. The third bullet sailed through both hindquarters and exited. From where the first shot struck, the bull only traveled a total of about 25 yards before going down, while the cow went down instantly and never got up."

From rump to brisket is pretty much full length.

JB

And to think, the evolving consensus for the last 50 years amoung professional hunters and experienced clients is that the 458 Win. Mag. (which I've used) barely has enough case-capacity to propel 500 gr. bullets fast enough for reliable penetration and killing power on buffalo, elephant, hippo, etc., and that cartridges like the 458 Lott, 450 Ackley, 450 Dakota, and 460 Wby. are not only much more reliable in terms of penetration, they kill much more convincingly as well, due to higher delivered energy. I've not yet discussed this subject with an experienced PH or well-blooded client who does not agree with this general consensus.

Now we're back to Square-One, wondering if a cartridge that is not even close to the equal of the constipated and anemic 458 Win. Mag. might not be just as good (sounds like we sure HOPE it is!) as the bigger cartridges, and under the premise that energy delivery really doesn't matter after all, but magic bullets do......

WOW! Have we forgotten the history of the big .458s on heavy African dangerous game?

By the way, JPK, if you can use it, I have a photo of a Cape buffalo I killed (at 20 feet) with a 458 Winchester and 500 gr. Trophy-Bonded 'Sledgehammer' solids loaded to 2100 fps., which is sort of the threshhold velocity. This photo is very unusual and graphic (bloody) in that it shows the entrance wound (front), as well as the exit wound, which is just to the right of the tail. I don't know of another pic that's quite like it..........

AD

I just returned from four days in the hospital. JWP475 must have gotten me with his 45-70 at 1000 yards.

Seriously, here is another thing to possibly test on dead animals. I have read where some PHs, including, I believe, Kevin "Doctari" Robertson, believe that solids fired from the 460 Weatherby and the like actually penetrate less than slower solids. They think there is some optimum velocity (2100--2300 fps) and that higher or lower velocity harms penetration.

Another interesting test would be to simulate the 420 hard-cast bullet from the 475 Linebaugh revolver at 1384 fps that a poster stated had outpenetrated a 416 Rigby.

BTW: The current issue of "American Hunter has an article where Bryce Towsley shot an American bison with eight 325 grain LeverEvolution bullets. Four of them exited. But all this 45-70 and black powder stuff is getting remarkably close to 12-gauge rifled slugs, especially saboted ones. I wonder why Alaska guides don't think much of slugs as brown bear stoppers.

Robertson says that energy is a "myth".

If that's so, then that must mean that gravity (and every other reality of physics) is a "myth" as well........

It sounds to me like a few of these guys are sort of making up and dreaming up the rules as they go along, and what works this week, at least in theory, won't necessarily work next week!

AD

Have any of you guys thought of using a LAW rocket or a RPG on those critters? I hear even T Rex is afraid of those rounds.

I'm thinking 50 BMG. Loaded with heavy-for-caliber solids of course.

-jeff

Jeff,
You cannot load my bullets with smokeless powder and expect them to work. They are bore diameter. You can't possibly need 40 of them anyway to shoot a dead buffalo from 10 ft.

If you change your mind and decide to load black, I'll make some for you, but it's a waste of time with smokeless.

You may shoot muzzleloaders, but few folks know much about the muzzleloaders that have relevance to the late American bpcr. I have three muzzleloaders that are built around the same bullets that I shoot in my Sharps.

Brent

Out of curiousity, how about 450 Marlin from a Browning BLR? Strong action. Is the brass any stouter than 45/70 brass?

-jeff

Jeff, modern brass is only as strong as the gun that houses it, and the loads in that action should be from a reputable source.
Indy, 12ga. sabot slugs (BRI style) are generally pure, soft, ductile lead, like in varmint bullet cores, and pure lead will easily deform, especially when striking large bones. Pure lead can penetrate well, but can be bent or twisted, limiting penetration. BRI did make some hard ones for law enforcement. They used them to shoot through concrete, and a friend even fired some (Deputy). The standard Brenneke slugs are also soft lead, but of a more stout design. HOWEVER, a 1oz. 1 1/8, 1 1/4 or whatever 12 ga slug of Foster or Brenneke style are almost as wide as they are long(wafers don't penetrate well), have very little S.D., and don't penetrate well as velocity drops off because they lack stability and S.D., which is needed to go through meat (also why they are prone to tumble in meat/bone). Good if very close, bad if past 35-50 yds. Other sabots are just pistol bullets, not solids.
For all the rancor about energy figures, why doesn't the 8 or 4 bores see use on buffalo any more? The reason is stated above. Low S.D., soft metal of that era, range and accuracy issues. The folks who admire (as I do) energy figures and awesome impacts pretty much have ignored that these two big bores were eliminated by SMALLER CALIBER bores with less impact effect, better accuracy,range, with superior bullets that penetrated better. Also note the large 4's and 8's did not achieve the mythical velocity window, but did manage some buffalo.
Today we can heat treat lead bullets, with low antimony content to prevent "shattering" and get them almost as hard as copper, and penetrate critters that would not fall to even a 4 bore under circumstances. With that as well as the introduction of flat nosed meplats on these bullets, which JACKETED solids now adorn, the mediocre 45/70 (or any other large caliber that must kill with solids) can do things we think it can't do, by holding straight line penetration and creating a "tissue spray" across the nose. See the Brian Pearce article, using the PEN solids, strangely shaped like so many LBT lead bullets and moulds.
I realize this is all speculation to you genuine buffalo hunters, but I have my own experiences, no matter how mediocre they may seem to you. I have seen whitetails "soak up" .72 cal "bullets" more than once in my short life, even an antelope that "soaked up" two .338 Noslers that left a melon hole on exit (neat to watch). The "energy" did not appear to aid in the departure of these critters, as I have shot critters with less, power wise, with quicker kills. I believe the holes through vital organs did, which explains fatal wounds and blood on the ground, necessary to harvest any of God's creatures, big or small.

458 Vs 45/70........Simple

If the 550 grain cast bullets at 1500 are the answer then you can have that in the 458. But you can also have the 500 grainers at 2100, just in case the last 100 years experience rings true

Or you can have 2400 f/s in the 458 with 400 grainers and so on.

If you prefer the 45/70 for whatever reason that does not change the fact that 458 has the 45/70 covered on all bases and then some.

Mike

Mike 378--Hawk1 pretty well spelled it out. He is dead on. Where you fellows that advocate the 458 come up short is that you are all hung up on the assumption that 500 grains is the magic big bullet weight. You need understand that 500 grains is the BOTTOM of the effective weight threshold for .458 diameter bullets. If the 458 Winchester used a HEAVIER BULLET in the 520 to 540 grain weight range, it would do a better job of giving consistent, deep penetration.

The 45-70's that really carry the mail use bullets in the 520 to 540 grain weight range. The extra 20 to 40 grains makes all the difference in the world.

My heavy load in my .458 utilizes the 550gn Woodleigh Weldcore @ 2050fps. Interestingly enough, this is the exact velocity that Gregor Woods from Magnum Magazine, loads to in his .458 LOTT using the exact same bullet for buffalo.

As Mike378 says, 2400fps with 400 grainers in the 458 is also a breeze. So is 2300fps with 450's.

AGW

A dozen or two pages back I stated that The devotees of the 45-70 were members of a cult. I submit this quote as adsolute proof of my assertion.

JPK, YOUR tests would be invalid no matter what because you are simply an infidel.

Why is that? Got a major case of the stupids I guess. You really do not know what you are talking about do you?

Ignorance is a problem that can be surmounted. Stupidity happens, but stupidy, plus determined ignorance is really just flat out pathetic.

If you knew anything about the bullets I shoot, or the dynamics of black powder, you would understand this in a New York minute. But hang with your pathetic arrogance and we can all "enjoy" your making a fool of yourself.

Brent

BrentD--Discouraging, ain't it?

It is. I don't mind that some folks don't know or that some even don't know that they don't know. But when someone makes such a point of making it so incredibly clear how stupid they can be, well I gotta wonder how folks like that make it through another day without someone holdin' their hands.

Have a good one guy. I'm going to gear up for another Creedmoor match. Swaginig 16:1 is not fun, but it does work.

Brent

Oh, but I thought the 45/70 case itself was not up to the task of 60,000 psi (or whatever) and I thought I remembered they'd beefed up the 450 case a little...

Anyway, a while back there was some doubt cast upon the Marlin action at extreme pressures. The BLR, which is available in 450 Marlin, is certainly capable of pressures up to full modern magnums, since it's essentially a lever-action bolt gun. I know that I, for one, would be MUCH more comfortable trying to load a 45/70 up to the kinds of speeds you guys have been mentioning if it was surrounded by a BLR rather than a Marlin action... I really didn't like what I was seeing when I tried to load my Guide Gun hot and that was only getting 2000+ fps with 300-gn bullets. The lever would pop open in my hand, primers were cratering around the firing pin, the brass was really stretching, etc. Not to mention the fact that the Marlin straight stock is NOT good at handling big recoil, IMHO.

Anyway...

-jeff

Jeff,
Hornady introduced the 450 so they could make a factory loaded round that could be used in the Marlin action, at the 42,000 psi pressure level, just like they list for the 45/70 in handloads. Kind of like the 454 Casull being longer than the 45 Colt. They are redesigns of existing cartridges that keep them out of old, weak guns and in the case of the 450, out of belted chambers as well.
I don't think I am arguing that a 45/70 is better than any 458 Win. I just don't understand why it's impossible for a 45/70, or any old American Express cartridge of large caliber, used with proper bullets, cannot cleanly take Buffalo, maybe even do a good job of it. It makes a bigger hole than any 375, especially if correctly designed flat nosed bullets are used, and have over 125 years been penetrating through NA's largest game, even with soft alloy, round nosed bullets. It may not breathe fire, especially with Black Powder, compared to say a 458 Lott, but I am curious to know what the speed and energy gives?
I am told penetration and "impact" or "stopping" effect. As I have stated before, I have shot animals of far lesser strength and size, have put big solids through shoulders and vital organs, and had them run off a ways. I even shot a fox squirrel with a 22 Hornet RN (over 2,000 fps), both "shoulders", no heart, who tried climbing a tree with his back legs! It is a good thing he did not try to charge, or I would have busted him again. I am sure folks have gone to Africa, and on more than one occasion used their DG rifles and solids to harvest plains game. Surely the speed, power, and penetration always results in a bang-flop, the little herbivores never taking a step, but having shot a couple of animals with solids myself, I doubt it. If you can't stop a deer sized critter with all that power, how can you stop a Buff? I think folks who stop them use good shooting first, and bullets up to the task second. I believe the 458, 375 and other cartridges got a bad rap when factory FMJ's performed like V-Maxes, or bent, not because they went too slow (unless the powder was ruined).
I have no fight in 45/70 v. 458, only I have been told that deer and cast bullets do not mix, lead is too soft to penetrate through anything, and have seen chickens run with their heads cut off.
Nobody here is stupid, stubborn maybe. Hell, no one here may even be wrong, unless you are shooting a bow and arrow.

Without scrolling up the thread I can't say for sure.... but it seems like guys were talking about getting 2000 fps with what, 450 or 500 grainers from the 45/70. Could that possibly be 42,000 psi? I'm asking; I don't know. All I know is that I twisted my 45/70 Marlin's tail about as hard as I was comfortable with just to break 2000 fps with 300 grain bullets from my 18" barrel...

But I don't want to get off on a tangent here. I just was pointing out that the 45/70 and 450 Marlin are available in a "HIGH-pressure" action, that's still a lever gun, in the Browning BLR. I don't know if that has any relevance at all.

-jeff

Not me. I have no use for 2000 fps.

Brent

Not me. I have no use for 2000 fps.

Brent
[/quote]

Or for reality either apparently. Let's see, the options are ignorant or delusional? Since you have delusional all sewn up I'll just stick to ignorant since I seem to have a hell of a lot of company...

Am I reading too much into all this, or have some guys talked themselves into thinking that all cartridge and bullet development stopped with the advent of smokeless powder and jacketed bullets?

AD

Yes, allen you are reading too much into it - of course you know that but you just love to argue anyway...

Brent

Brent,

Please explain why loading your bullets to your velocity over a "nitro for black" loading won't work.

BTW, many of the old - and current - British "nitro for black" loadings untilized - and still do - paper patched bullets.

Also, for the benefit of all, it is illegal to fly with black powder, whether in a canister or in a cartridge.

JPK

I have found that 450gr flat nose solids out penetrate 500gr round nose solids by a good margin, ~40%. 450's at 2190fps, 500's at 2135fps.

Others with larger capacity cartridges, like the 458 Lott, have found that the 550's at 2050fps or so out penetrate the 500's at 2150fps and more, up to about 2200fps.

These results are somewhat cantadictory when you look at only bullet weights. I believe the contadiction is explained by bullet shape, with the advantage going to the wide flat nose shape.

JPK

Muledeer,

I meant publish the reults of forthcoming test of participant's favorite bullets at their favorite velocities, not Pearce's article.

Sorry for the confusion, but thanks for the "reprint." I recall the cow, and the shoot through, but again not the nearly end to end penetration reported. From the stern to the brisket, if repeatable and reliable, would be enough in my book.

JPK

ALL,

DO WE HAVE FOLKS REPRESNTING THE "CAMPS" WITH BULLETS THEY WANT TO BE TESTED, AT THEIR VELOCITIES - BUT PROPELED BY SMOKELESS POWDER?

JPK

JPK, my bullets are .443" in diameter. They are then patched to .450" using the proper paper. In a hunting bullet, I would size them back down to .448" to accommodate fouling. The bullets I would send you would be on the order of 16:1 alloy and possibly tempered with a little help from HawkI.

The bullet is to be loaded with approximately 1.4" of its overall length into the rifling. Only 0.1" remains in the case. It cannot be conventially crimped or the patch will be damaged. A taper crimp is used.

If you shoot such a bullet with smokeless powder, the bullet will obturate slowly, if at all. As a result, gas will jet between the bullet and the grooves of the rifling. The hot gasses will cut the paper and melt the lead (alloy has a lower melt point than pure lead to make this even worse) and you will end up with a soldered bore. The bullet will perform poorly.

Blackpowder, for whatever reason, will obturate a bullet much more quickly and the net result is that the gas flow does not develop, the patch survives intact, no leading occurs and the bullet flies true.

I cannot make you a groove diameter bullet because I do not have the dies to make them. They cost several hundreds of dollars for a set. And, a conventionally loaded paper patched bullet in a conventionally throated rifle is likely to have its patch die on the spot when the patch fails to make it fulling into the rifle.

The bottomline is that if you don't want to do it right, don't do it half way, the results would be, if not disasterous, at least a real PITA and in conclusive.

This is not just a matter of "downloading" some oversized pistol bullets. If you do not know what you are doing, you are likely to make a mess of things.

Brent

WOW, that's what my Marlin in .44Mag. was doing. I thought I wasn't strong enough to hold the lever close and this with standard factory loads that Marlin says is safe with their rifles.

www.wildwestguns.com customizes Marlin lever actions for a DG rifle for Africa for whatever this is worth. I've used some of their parts in my former .44Mag. Marlin. If their parts are an example of their work their rifles should be super.

Brent,

I can't do the black powder because loading it here and taking it to Africa is illegal. And I wouldn't do it because of the loggistics of shooting black powder/time and the constraints of being on a safari.

As I mentioned, paper patched bullets are common over "nitro for black" loads. So there must be a way.

Question: If your bullets are taper crimped with only .1" in the case and 1.4" of bullet into the rifling, how do you unload your rifle without leaving the bullet in the rifling? Or is the bullet only bumping the rifling past where the patch begins?

Have you tried your bullets over smokeless? There is a fellow named Sherman Bell, who writes for Double Gun Journal, who has tested black, smokeless and duplex loads and who has demonstrated that the pressure curve of black and at least some smokless equivelent loads are all but identical.

BTW, he took a 450 Express with hard lead bullets to Australia and successfully shot water buffalo. (might have been a 500 Express) I don't believe he uded paper patched bullets for that hunt though. If you cannot see a way to successfully test your bullets with nitro for black loadings perhaps he can pitch in an idea. I'll try to cpntact him if you can't see a way of if other posters on this thread can't see a way to make it work.

You may not think I need 40 bullets, but if I was loading for any bullet I would want at least that many if I wanted a usable load when I was finished. For just shooting four or five rounds into dead buff, I think 20 bullets would do - 15 to get the loading and velocity down and five for shooting into a buff. That would eliminate the possiblity of using the load on a live buff.

JPK

JPK,

Again, you are wrong. You can take loaded bp cartridge on planes. Not only have I done it, many others have as well. And I have had it investigated officially from the top. Not a problem. Loose powder as in a muzzleloader cannot be taken but cartridges may. This is not an opinion. It is a researched fact.

As for "the way" to shoot them with smokeless, it is doable, but you must start with a larger diameter bullet. Groove or groove +1 and a decent throat. I cannot help you with this because I do not have the dies to make such bullets. I'm not going to spend $300+ do do it either.

The bullets are crimped - taper crimped- so they will extract just fine.

I not shoot smokeless powder ever. Well there is one exception. .22 rf. I have only one box of bp loads for .22rf and I sort of treasure them for special purposes.

Here is a webpage I created a long time ago. It is incomplete and out of date, but it gives you an idea of what we are talking about.

http://www.iastate.edu/~codi/PPB/PPB.html

Brent

I don't have some pet rifle hobby that I must indulge in at every opporunity or past the point of all reason, collective experience, and common-sense. With me, African hunting is all about business, pure and simple, and I like to treat it that way. So I use the best and most established, proven tools for the job at hand -- something that'll work at spitting distance and at all points in between, plus under the worst condiditons that might be encountered. This is what experience has taught me to be the most prudent and practical approach.

I feel a strong obliged to make such recommendations to others as well, not just hand out happy pills that are formulated to appease every obsolete notion, every pet theory...........

AD

I love you allen, you are such a pompous ass when you try to slap folks around. What you reall are saying is that you hate it when we don't all roll over and kiss your feet and the ground you pee on, but rather actually work rather hard to know exactly what we are talking about and what can and was and is being done by folks that actually understand something of the technology.

Go stick with your rocket launchers. I have no problem with that, but having made your statement and with nothing useful, constructive, or new to add to you bluster, please find another set of accolytes to carry your torches for you...

Brent

One of my friends and I were discussing different hunters we knew, and the one thing we figured out that they all had in common was, much to their credit, they didn't waste their valuable time arguing with other hunters on the internet......

And that's what this whole thread has been, a waste of time - sort of like slugging it out verbally in a college philosophy class with some career-type, hippie-type student, or like arguing with a guy standing behind the counter at a local gunstore who has never killed an elk and has never hunted dangerous game in Africa, but who's more than willing to argue about such stuff with you anyway!

It must be easier to try to teach your dog how to speak Spanish, and likely a whole lot more rewarding a that!

Brent, go ahead and keep on cussing me, and by all means, get yourself a quality Cape buffalo safari booked at your earliest convenience. You guys keep on hammering this thread out. I'm sure it'll continue to be a rewarding experience........

AD

Gee guy, I don't cuss you. I laugh at you.

Seems it takes two to argue and here you are. So I guess you're pretty much what you despise, someone that talks about hunting on the internet... Calling folks names and what not. Now I'm a hippie-type eh? That's groovy. I'll live with it..

Meanwhile get yourself some education on old cartidges and their ways. You could learn a trick or three. Then you would have something to argue with!

Brent

JPK,
What weight would YOU be comfortable with? I really appreciate the fact that your are willing to try out lead. If need be, I would get a mould that would meet your requirements, and would gladly make them for you! They will be an LBT Flat nosed design, and will be shaped like your jacketed solids. If it helps, I do have a 416 LFN mould and have used it full power and with reduced loads.
Producing nitro for black can be tricky, but is done with proper fillers.
Brent, I know little about paper patching, I saw your site, and its pretty cool. I believe you can use smokeless and PP bullets, as obturation can be controlled with pressure and burning speeds of powder, which cover a wide gamut. There is a conversion I have used for cordite and black powder; substituting with smokeless powders. Dacron fillers, while not nostalgic, can help seal off blowby, keep a bore clean, and control obturation. I use it frequently in loads that gas checks are not available, or for guns with large throats. I even use it in a 45/70 revolver with reduced "dirty" loads.
FWIW, I believe Dave Scovill used a BPE bullet with his load, but made it harder than coventional tin/lead alloy. It was a round nosed bullet with an extremely high S.D. Brian used a lighter bullet, but a WFN design, and jacketed, but got adequate penetration as well (probablya better wound channel as well.)
As a side note: I am a great fan of someone who believed the 270 was not adequate for elk, even when offered "magic" bullets. Imagine if the close mindedness was perpetuated.

Brent, you're funny, and believe it or not, I'm not against you, as a person or as a hunter, at all. In fact, I wish you ever success.

Nor did I refer to you, personally, as a hippie-type. I compared discussions such as this one to arguing with such characters back in college.

AD

Brent,

I have read several pieces, with citations, that discuss the issue of legality, or not, of transporting black powder in aircraft in any form of container, whether that container was a cartridge shell or some other. I came to the conclusion that it is illegal to transport in any container in any aircraft, whether passenger or cargo. I can't find the references now, though I looked briefly. If I locate them in the near future I will refer you to them. I looked on FAA's website and didn't find any specific references using their search, only the generic reference regarding 2kgs of ammo, but with an exception referring to a section of the CFR. I didn't go look at that section.

Explain to me two things:
1. Your website describes hand seating the bullets with no crimp, have you gone to a taper crimping die or are you relying on just a pressfit?
2. Your website also describes the bullet seated so that it is well up the throat of your rifle, this is what I was trying to ask earlier, is the bullet really 1.4" into the rifling or just bumping the rifling with the leading edge of the paper patch further forward?

JPK

Hawk1,

At the velocities you all are talking, I don't think there will be any issues with bullet weight. So I say you all pick two or three different bullets and velocities and I'll get them loaded up and give them a go. I don't want to be picking bullets to represent the 45/70 crowd's side of the argument, thats for sure!

The rifle I that I would do the experimental shooting with is a 458wm. If things work out perfectly, and they don't often, I'll have a buddy coming who might be able to take an additional rifle, a 458 Lott, or ask the PH if I can barrow his 458 Lott. My 458wm is a double rifle and getting different loads and different bullets to shoot to POA is a pita. Not so with a single barrel rifle, like the Lotts.

Not an issue if I'm just shooting tests into dead buff though.

JPK

The legality of flying with loaded bp cartridges was investigated by a friend who is a federal employee who specializes in transportation issues pertaining to hazzardous cargo. He spends a lot of time in Washington so he arranged a meeting with the folks that matter in the FAA administration and had this specifically addressed. He is a hunter and bpcr shooter like myself.

It should be 5 kg of ammo.

1. Yes, I have gone to a taper crimp for hunting ammo and I use no crimp in special situations more related to target shooting. I have hunted with no-crimp ammo but it is a bit of a PITA. When go the no crimp route, I instead necksize without reexpanding and the bullet will usually seat just tight enough that it will not fall out immediately. However, it will often remain in the bore when a gun is unloaded. Then I have to tap it out from the muzzle. Not a big deal, but a PITA nonetheless.

2. Yes, it really is in there. Way up in the rifling. The bullet is a friction fit with the lands of the bore so this is possible in a clean bore. In a fouled bore, you would need to have a slightly smaller diameter to make it go w/o destroying the patch. That and some fancy lube requirements. Sharpsguy is pretty good at that stuff.

A bolt gun would never be able to handle the loads that I make. The OAL is too much. A Lott would not be able to load a cartridge with an additional 1.4" of bullet hanging out the front. Your double or any singleshot could however.

Brent

JPK--You arrived at an incorrect conclusion. You should have read the CFR. It IS legal to fly with cartridges loaded with black powder. It is not legal to fly with loose powder, such as a powder horn or can of powder. When the powder is loaded into a cartridge at that point it becomes small arms ammunition and not an explosive by definition.

Brent is right. This is NOT a guess or speculation. I returned from RSA the 14th of April, and my rifle was a 45-110 Sharps shooting cartridges loaded with black powder and 520 grain lead bullets. I had the print out of the TSA regs with me, including the CFR. I didn't need them. They saw my cartridge boxes, verified that I was under the 5kg limit, and that was it.

I hesitate to send you the bullets you ask for because I suspect that you will load them to suit your own perceptions of the proper velocity. It has become obvious that you and a couple of others have no grasp whatever or knowledge of how or how well these loads work. This ain't Macdonalds. You don't get it your way. Reason? Your way doesn't work with these bullets, and I have no intention of making bullets so that you can attempt to re-invent the wheel, screw it up, and then say it won't work. It WILL work, and work well, but not the way you intend to do it.

Jeff,
I'm looking at Hornadays Fifth Edition Handbook and on page 513 they went to 50,000 CUP with Winchester Brass for 45-70 in Ruger, Browning and Wickliffe single shot rifles. I don't know what that translates to in PSI but I believe it it is close to 30-06 pressures. I believe that 45-70 brass is prbably as strong as 450 brass.
I have in the past loaded some of these really hot loads for a Ruger No. 3 (OUCH) and have had no problems.

Doc

Thanks Doc.
Put another way, if BRASS is the test, imagine cutting down a "strong" 454 Casull case and use Ruger data with a 300gr. bullet and firing a cylinder through a 45 Colt SAA. I said IMAGINE! DO NOT DO IT! 'Nuff said.
To everyone: I plan on getting an LBT mould for 500gr., LFN. I already have a 385 that I shoot from my revolver (45/70 using Ruger loads ). JPK can load these to whatever speeds we all can "agree" on at whatever alloy. He can even fill up his 458 (45-120?) or 458 Lott with BP and they will shoot fine, at least good enough to cap a dead buff 10 ft away. I don't even care if he uses the same loads for his jacketed bullets; as long as that is noted in the "test". LBT also makes a 540 gr spitzer, shaped like the long range target bullets, if someone wants to go that route.
I have some 1/20 tin lead I use to make "partitions" out of for my .338 and 35 Whelen, shot at jacketed speeds. We can use that, if someone wants. My only wish is to have heat treated alloys used for a few tests as well, maybe even my dinky pistol bullet. I think your idea is pretty cool JPK! Hell, if I can't go to Africa a few of my bullets might as well.... I still think you will be pleasantly surprised. When did you say you were leaving? I hope I can get the mould soon enough! Thanks!
Nate

Thanks guys.

I do understand that the gun is the pressure vessel, not the brass, but still... some brass was designed from the git-go for high pressures, other brass wasn't. 45/70 wasn't, hence my question.

I'm still pimpin' the Browning BLR in 450 or 45/70. Strong action, and it's a lever gun. Best of all worlds! If a feller wanted to shoot a 45/70 into dangerous African game, that is, which I don't particularly.

-jeff

I love the 45-70 its been around stompin butt and about put an end to the american Bison for well over a hundred years now and back in those days the 45-70 was a pop gun compared to todays standards and was still knockin em dead,I dont understand the theory about somthing that can kill you,I spoke with anold man once that talked of a buffalo {Bison} Hunt,3 hunters involved,one man shot a big bull and didnt hit him well,and to hear this gent tell the story this old bull Bison was nothing to mess around with and once gotten too that stage of the game it took several more shots to put the bull down to stay,when i first got my 45-70 I loaded up ten rounds HOT and took em down to the river to try em on for size,firing at a mud bank about 100 yds away the first thought to enter my mind after watching that bullet impact that mud bank was it just didnt seem feasable to believe that anything that walks on earth could take that kind of a hit and remain on its feet for long,as the old gunwriter put it,it kicks like a mule and hits like a locomotive,who was the man for I cannot remember his name but in his lifetime killed over a thousand elephants,shooting them with a 7X57,I grew up around a bunch of old men that believed its all about where you put the bullet,not how big a gun you use.....

JPK,
Will you be able to evaluate permanent wound channel in your testing? Penetration is important as far as reaching vital organs but once there important organs need to be destroyed. My concern with slower bullets is they may pencil through soft tissue even if shattering a chunk of rib on exit. Gelatin tests of high velocity bullets usually show a short entry of small diameter, a section of large wound channel, reduction of wound channel as velocity drops then a long small diameter channel. Wouldn't the large dia wound channel (high velocity) be best for a quick kill (non CNS).

Jeff, I see no reason why you couldn't use a BLR if you wanted, but the high pressures are unnecessary in my opinion and the BLR handles like a jackhandle with an elephant turd attached (and looks like it to me).

I had a Belgian made BLR once upon a time. It was definitely not my favorite rifle by a very long shot and one of the very few that I do not regret selling.

But it certainly would work if it could be made to feed a rimmed case - or go with the unrimmed alternativels.

Brent

Although this really has nothing to do with buffalo hunting, I thought i would toss it up there just for fun.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b59f573156

The shooter is Dave Gullo - a multi world champ in BPCR Creedmore and national champ in silhouette etc etc. He is a hell of a shot. The range on that target is, I believe just over 1500 yds but I could be mistaken. I know for sure it is well over 1000 yds.

The rifle is an orginal Sharps Borchardt and the cartridge is a .45-100 (2.6").

Brent

86,
This is exactly why the LBT shapes were designed. They involve a tissue spray at lower velocities through meat. Ironically, as I have stated before, jacketed DG solids use these in many designs today simply because this is what folks noticed with RN solids. Straight line penetration is also improved, provided the flat nose is not too wide. Wadcutters make a hell of a tissue spray, but do not penetrate very well.

Brent,
A couple years ago Ross Seyfried took a 461 Gibbs No2 to Botswana. The footage of him taking a buff appeared on Tony Makris' show on Espn2. If memory serves he used a 560 gr 459 PP bullet over an unknown charge of black.

It might be worth corrresponding with Ross as to the penetration he got.

SOS

SOS, I have swapped a couple of emails with Seyfried in the past about an 18 bore double rifle that I own. He is a sorta tough guy to converse with and I never actually could do so on my own. It was all through an intermediary (or the appearances of one). Rather strange.

I'd be interested in what he had to say, but I'll let you ask him. I don't even know how I would reach him today.

Brent

I know BLR's are a little... eh... "non-traditional" for some folks. I think I've seen the word "abomination" used to describe them. I really like them, and I think they handle just fine... at least the one I have now, with the new pistol-grip stock and chambered in .325 WSM. In fact were I ever to go to Africa I'd seriously consider it as a plains game rifle. It's short, an inch shorter than my 22" 30-06; it's light, it's MOA accurate, and the cartridge is potent and it's the fastest repeater I've ever handled short of a semi-auto.

But I can CERTAINLY see how they'd rub a BP, Sharps traditionalist wrong! They are sort of the platypus of rifles.

-jeff

My first impression: I don't know who this guy is but I doubt if he is a very good long range shot. He needs a higher cheekpiece so he can get a good spot weld. Removing your cheek from the rifle is very bad form. Also, resting the rifle on hard sticks will cause variable elevation errors. If he came to the 1000-yard championships at Camp Perry, he would be laughed off the range. For that matter, unless there are some strange rules in BCCR, I suspect that many other shooters would easily beat him.

I must be missing something. What is it?

Now Indy you are talking stupid again. If you think you are better than a two time World Champ, have at it. Your cluelessness is showing again.

If there are so many others that can shoot so well, just gotta show up.

Thats what I love about this place. Folks, of their own volition make complete asses of themselves.

Brent

Indy--If you ever get the chance to shoot against Dave Gullo, my best advice would be for you to leave your wallet, your checkbook, and your credit cards at home. Otherwise, he will drain your bank account.

Since you are clueless, I will say that Dave was the highest scoring shooter from any nation at the World Longrange Championships in South Africa last year. He and the rest of the American team won the World Championship, and Gullo was awarded the individual gold medal for high individual aggregate score. He won the individual aggregate by a comfortable margin shooting against competitors from South Africa and a number of European countries, as well as the United States.

Buffalo Arms Company is the leading supplier of shooting equipment and accessories for black powder cartridge rifles in the world. It is owned by Dave Gullo.

You really do need to get out more--

Jeff,
I've seen pictures of your .325 and actually like the looks of that rifle and your new TSX load is impressive. I think that rifle is one of the "best damn" elk rifles available.
I suspect that a Browning lever in .450 could handle pressures approaching or equal to say 30-06 pressures but haven't ran across anyone who has published anything on it. I believe the ballistics would be close to the really hot loads published for the 45-70 in Ruger or Browning Single Shots as case capacity is very similar.
Doc

Thanks Doc!

At least someone out there is seeing the light with regards to the short action, magnum BLR's. :-) They really are in a category by themselves as far as what they can do, for what they weigh and measure. They came out with an all-weather version right after I finally received mine; lammie stock and stainless barrel and, of course, the aluminum reciever. I dunno... I have a bunch of stainless/lammie rifles, and I kind of like how the blue/walnut BLR is picking up some "patina". I may even take steel wool to that shiny finish.

A Neil Jones trigger job is necessary to make them shootable, though, IMHO.

Anyway... enough about BLR's... thanks for indulging me...

-jeff

Brent, PM on the way.

SOS

Sharpsguy,

I'll follow up on the CFR.

I will load any bullets you wish to send me at the velocity that you specify.

I know what works for the 458wm or Lott, etc, and so do you. The interesting opoortunity is to see if what you all think will work actually does. I'm a least as curious as you are about this.

JPK

Brent,

I'll shoot a loose crimped bullet way up the spout for a test, after the buff is dead. But the loose bullet makes the load unsuitable for DG use, no matter what the penetration turns out to be. Can you imagine stuffing a stick or rod down the barrel in the heat of a charge after a mis-fire?

Have you tried your PP'd bullets over smokeless? If you don't wish too you can sens me a few and I'll try them and photo the PP to see what happens.

JPK

I will evaluate wound channel as best as possible. This can be a very subjective evaluation and can take more than a few bullets in one or two game animals to come up with what is a sense of different effects. I have done it with flat nose copper solids vs steel jacketed round noses at 458wm velocities and come to the conclusion that flat nose bullets create greater damage and a larger diameter wound channel.

JPK

jpk, I'll send you a few bullets. If you taper crimp instead of roll crimp, you will have much better luck. They can be made to hold together just fine for any purpose that way. If you must roll crimp do so VERY VERY lightly. This may not work for hunting purposes and the load in the #2 barrel may not handle recoil of the #1 barrel. But it would work for a penetration test.

I can send you a roundnose design that I'm currently making for various purposes, or a flatnose that would be fine on most things, but would not be the design for a buffalo bullet since it has a stepped ogive. These are what I have handy at the moment.

HawkI can send you a better flatnose design, albeit in a grease groove configuration.

No, I do not shoot smokeless of any kind, but under-diameter bullets of harder alloy will not bump up sufficiently with smokeless. At least that is the word that is on the streets among folks that actually shoot these types of bullets. If you try it and solder your rifling into a smoothbore, well, don't cry on my shoulder.

My bullets would be 16:1 and NOT tempered. HawkI knows more about that than I do - As I said earlier, it is something I know exists but I do not know about the details because I have never had to.

Brent

+

Hawk1,

The test is limited to smokeless powder, but I'll load bullets to the velocity you specify.

I haven't got a date or specific hunt lined up, only deposits with two outfitters, Roger Whittall Safaris and Charlton McCullum Safaris. I anticipate going on a hunt in about May of next year. This will be primarily an elephant hunt, but I'll shoot a buff or two if I end up on the hunt I want.

JPK

Brent,
Yes, you can shoot the hardened metal bullets. By using two alloys. Tin lead alloys will not harden when heat treated. If you make the base out of your standard alloy, say 1/4 to 1/3 from the bottom, and use WW metal for the nose, to ride the lands, you can shoot your loads with PP. This is why SOS told you to contact Ross, as this is how he made the Metford sing for Buff. This is how I make softnoses (partitions), just in reverse using metered dippers and two pots. This will work for you, but diameters on your bullet will get smaller wherever you use WW metal versus tin/lead. The more tin ratio you have, the larger the bullet before and after sizing! WW metal will also change the weight of your bullet, to a minor degree.
Obviously this is not for long range target precision, but "improves" bullet performance under hunting situations, and I believe Ross has used this method quite a bit on game, otherwise very few would know about it.
The neat thing about lead, if you know what you are doing, is that it is VERY predictable, because YOU can control your bullets. Our bulletmaker's do a whale of a job making bullets, but they can always point a finger when performance is not right!
I don't suspect you, or that great shot in the video puts your reputation on bullets someone else makes!

HawkI, I know about 2-part bullets but I sure as hell ain't gonna make them for someone else, and I don't need them. The slug gun competitive shooters use them for the ultimate in muzzleloading accuracy. I could have dies made to swage these but it's way more time and money than I have for some else's education.

I do know that lead:tin alone cannot be tempered. I think some antimony is needed but not much. I have heard of folks tempering bullets made of Lyman #2 so that the bullets are very strong, but not brittle. Again, the details escape me. If it was me going buffalo hunting, I'd be looking into such things and I'd be ordering some new swaging dies, possibly with a flat nose but maybe not. But I'm not going buffalo hunting. So 16:1 is all I'm willing to wager on this experiment. Swaging bullets, good bullets, is a time consuming (and expensive) task.

Brent

Brent and Hawk I will give you guys credit for one thing, you guys are very dedicated to your craft. I would never find the time for that much passion.

I am interested in seeing the results of this field test. Is there a way that an agreement can be made so JPK can test these as he agreed to? Is a common solution optainable? Brent I understand that this involves time, money, and effort on your end making the bullets as well as JPK that has to get them to shoot in his rifle and spend his money on trophy fees to see this test come to fruition.
If not is there really any reason for you gentleman to go to all this effort and expense?

I hear ya, but how far are you reducing your current alloy? Since the WW metal is usually smaller, sometimes the sizer/swage will just "skin" that part, and the diameters will be identical.
Lyman No. 2, in its original form, is a tin lead alloy, and is limited in hardness factor (expensive too!) I'm set in my ways as far as certain alloys as well. Do you like your Corbin products? I am considering some of their products, but for jacketed.
If anyone is interested the cast bullet forum is a great place to ask.
JPK I will get the mould ordered. I the meantime I'm going to jack up my 416 Rigby and see what I get with some media testing, perhaps do my own "lead v. jacketed", at full power and around 2100 fps. I know what they'll do at 2,600 + and under 2,000. (grins)
I will gladly try to experiment wherever I can. I think everyone here has their own ideas as to what works, and I enjoy dinking with cast bullets, they are just another way to enjoy hunting and shooting. Some guys like going to Africa with their handloads, some guys want their BULLETS and IDEAS (not my idea, has been done) to go there, and in my case am willing and will see that it happens.
I have moulds for almost every caliber I load for, and being able to cast makes them all shootable, even at full speeds, with the same POI, and its REALLY an advantage when you will all see bullet/metal prices next month and going into winter.
If the thread dies I will PM JPK and see that he gets his bullets, as long as I can get my mould cut, which I can't control!
Peter Mauser lost an eye making a rifle, buying a mold and shipping some bullets is pretty cheap!

HawkI,
Not sure what you mean by reducing my current alloy?

I'm not sure that you are dialed in on what I'm doing exactly. My swaging is really nothing like sizing. I have to make it flow to bleed off the excess lead in a core slug and then it is reswaged in a second die to give it the shape I want. I start with a .430" core of about 565 gr. I then turn it into putty to make it .443" and 550 gr in a perfect cylinder.

That cylinder is then swaged to final form. The process starts with a small diameter slug and increases its diameter. It does not skin them down.

I'm not sure if I can swage Lyman #2 or not. But it's more than just lead/tin. But I don't know much else. My hope would be to swage it and then temper it after the fact.

Yep, I like my Corbin products, but I have two sets. One from Dave and one from Richard. They may be brothers, but they have a different look on the world and have two independent companies that make different stuff. It is hard to give the edge to either but if I had to choose one, I would choose Richard I think. Esp. for the really big hard stuff like this.

Brent

PS. One way I could make a flat nosed bullet would be to cut the nose off with a saw and a jig set up. I'm not against that, but it does seem crude. I have heard from one guy that did this for a trip to Africa with a Sharps. Apparently, it worked perfectly well too. I reckon I could build the jigs to do it in my shop.

Brent

Blaser,
I've spent 12-14 yrs at this. That's not much compared to the folks that really know what they are doing. Sharpsguy has been doing this since - well since God was playing pool with the stars in the universe I think. Paul Matthew's spent a lot of years before me, and hell, there was an entire industry that was doing this 130 yrs ago. It has not faded away and rediscovering a little of what they knew is what this is all about. A lot of folks have recovered a lot of ground in the last 10 yrs or so.

We can see what we can do, but I'd much rather spend a few hundred dollars on something more directly useful. I think we can get a pretty good idea of what's possible with what we have on hand.

Brent

I see what you are doing, and the fact that you eliminate all voids, which is very difficult to do casting, is another reason you guys achieve such precision. I can also understand firing PP through a "rough" rifle bore with jacketed fouling to boot, as it can pose challenges for cast as well. I was under the impression you were swaging with die blanks, not using any heat and using lead wire or billets, much like the jacketed "impact" process. It does sound like work, especially in summer!
Lyman No. 2 alloy is basically anything 16 BHN, regardless of its ingredients. The original formula had a TON of tin. It may be even less fun to press, but will have a lower melt (putty) point. Tin does make the alloy more liquidous; it may be easier?
To heat treat anything it must have lead, antimony, tin, and a trace (1/10th 1%) arsenic. Tin cannot be greater than antimony.
As far as your flatnose, using 1/16 will make it expand more than round nose configuration, since the alloy is soft enough. It will be almost like shooting a jacketed expanding bullet, as long as impact is above 1,000 fs. As you guys are aware, especially in RN configuration, 500+ gr. high SD 45 cals. can penetrate very well, with a "soft" alloy. Many a bison was taken with pure lead and 1/20!
It might be of consideration, but tin/lead alloys DO age soften over a few months time, even faster at high heat. This can affect your obturation levels as much as changing your alloy; perhaps you are already aware of this?
Thanks for the info. Have you ever done business with Jacobsen's i.e. gunsmithing? I am looking at a rechamber, and 'smiths are few in between in IA, and I don't trust machinists regarding guns! Good Luck!

All,

Because of the length of this thread and the different topics covered, I propose moving future post regarding this bullet test to a new thread and I'll open one in the hopes that those interested will join in there.

JPK

Here is some interesting data to contemplate. It was posted by "Rusty Hook" on the AR forum. It is for swedish moose I believe. I know that moose, esp. swedish moose, are not huge but that's not the point here. Look at the narrow differences in any reasonable measure of performance for the calibers listed here. And look at the sample sizes.

And look at how little difference caliber and power of the gun makes.

Just food for thought on the "how much gun is enough" debate.

No average distance for the first hit was given in the data I read.

As for the bigger is always better school, here is the info for the 338 Wm, 358NM, the 9.3s, the 375 H&H, 416 Taylor, 458 WM and the 460 WBY:

338 WM..111 moose killed, 1.5 rounds required, 31 meters traveled until down.

358NM..192 moose killed, 1.2 rounds required on average, 36 meters traveled.

9.3 x 62..306 moose killed, 1.4 rounds required, traveled 36 meters.

9.3 x 64..5 moose killed, 1.6 rounds required, distance traveled on average 50 meters.

9.3 x 74..7 moose killed, 1.2 rounds required, 32 meters traveled.

375 H&H..265 moose killed, 1.4 rounds required, distance traveled 30 meters on average.

416 Taylor..17 moose killed, 1.3 rounds required, 27 meters traveled.

458 WM..18 moose killed, 1.3 rounds required, 18 meters traveled.

460 WBY..3 moose killed, 1.3 rounds required, 70 meters traveled.

As can be seen, bigger and faster didn't kill significantly better. Dogs are required to track and find wounded game, so almost no game is lost. Before a hunter can get a tag, he has to demonstrate an acceptable degree of accuracy on a running moose target to a specified range. So the firearms proficiency for Swedish hunters on average is probably better than it is for American hunters. Swedish citizens are limited to owning a total of 5 fire arms.

And for the 270 and 7MM Remington magnum fans that feel they have been left out, here is your data:

270 W.. 7 moose killed, 1.4 rounds required, average distance traveled 64 meters.

7MM RM.. 75 moose killed, 1.4 rounds required, 47 meters traveled...

Brent