-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Dave's New Levergun -- a Pacific Northwest Saga
- Thread starter Dave Rishar
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,178
Shooting at paper plates yesterday:
-- The crimps made no difference whatsoever in velocity. The WC860 might have burned a little more completely. I'm not positive and had no way to really measure it, but it seemed that way. Accuracy was reduced; I missed the plate a few times. The 500-grainers will not be loaded in the magazine and therefore don't need a crimp in the first place so I won't be crimping them any longer.
-- The 405's picked up maybe 100 fps over the 500's. If I'm going to stick with the WC860 there really is no need for them. With a powder somewhat appropriate for the .45-70 the difference would probably be more noticable. They were cast from the same alloy (more or less) and the Lee mold, the hollow base design. Still no leading but they were not quite as accurate as the 500's. They followed roughly the same trajectory.
-- Best group for the 500's at 100 yards: 3 rounds --> 2.6". Best group for the 500's at 200 yards: 2.9". I've read of bullets that "gain" accuracy over long distance but never really understood it, nor believed it. I believe it a bit more now. My guess is that it takes these large and slow bullets a little more distance to fully stabilize. At 100 we're just about there. At 200, we're there. I'd bet that the 300 yard group wouldn't look much different other than being lower. An appropriate powder and better bullets would probably make a difference.
I investigated the dirt around the 180-yard plate on someone's recommendation but could find no real trace of my bullets. I'm not sure if they're disintegrating or simpy bouncing back and burrowing into the ground. My alloy is fairly hard after heat treating but there have been a few times where I noted obvious and spectacular splashes on the ground in front of the plates immediately after a hit, so it actually could be both. I'll keep looking.
My .45-55-500 is still not a bad load -- just bring a Boresnake with you.
-- The crimps made no difference whatsoever in velocity. The WC860 might have burned a little more completely. I'm not positive and had no way to really measure it, but it seemed that way. Accuracy was reduced; I missed the plate a few times. The 500-grainers will not be loaded in the magazine and therefore don't need a crimp in the first place so I won't be crimping them any longer.
-- The 405's picked up maybe 100 fps over the 500's. If I'm going to stick with the WC860 there really is no need for them. With a powder somewhat appropriate for the .45-70 the difference would probably be more noticable. They were cast from the same alloy (more or less) and the Lee mold, the hollow base design. Still no leading but they were not quite as accurate as the 500's. They followed roughly the same trajectory.
-- Best group for the 500's at 100 yards: 3 rounds --> 2.6". Best group for the 500's at 200 yards: 2.9". I've read of bullets that "gain" accuracy over long distance but never really understood it, nor believed it. I believe it a bit more now. My guess is that it takes these large and slow bullets a little more distance to fully stabilize. At 100 we're just about there. At 200, we're there. I'd bet that the 300 yard group wouldn't look much different other than being lower. An appropriate powder and better bullets would probably make a difference.
I investigated the dirt around the 180-yard plate on someone's recommendation but could find no real trace of my bullets. I'm not sure if they're disintegrating or simpy bouncing back and burrowing into the ground. My alloy is fairly hard after heat treating but there have been a few times where I noted obvious and spectacular splashes on the ground in front of the plates immediately after a hit, so it actually could be both. I'll keep looking.
My .45-55-500 is still not a bad load -- just bring a Boresnake with you.
I must say......your evaluation was outstanding. Thank you!
Do you reload?
If so, get yourself some 300gr bullets and slow burning powder. Load 'em up! This bullet size is more then enough medication for anything other then "dangerous game". I know of at least 3 deer that have spent some time in my freeze with the .44 RemMag........from a handgun! You've got 12" more barrel, and a longer sight radius for aiming.......your rifle is just fine for hunting.
Scott B
Do you reload?
If so, get yourself some 300gr bullets and slow burning powder. Load 'em up! This bullet size is more then enough medication for anything other then "dangerous game". I know of at least 3 deer that have spent some time in my freeze with the .44 RemMag........from a handgun! You've got 12" more barrel, and a longer sight radius for aiming.......your rifle is just fine for hunting.
Scott B
Nice gun. Those 45/70s are alot of fun to fool with. IIRC RCBS makes a 500 gr. FP mold with a crimping groove that will allow 2.55" OAL and should work in a tube mag. but it doesn't leave much room for powder. However, I have been using 15 - 17 gr. of Unique quite a bit lately which almost duplicates black powder pressures/velocity, and something like that would fit.
I've read of bullets that "gain" accuracy over long distance but never really understood it, nor believed it. I believe it a bit more now. My guess is that it takes these large and slow bullets a little more distance to fully stabilize. >>>>>>>>>> Dave
misnomer. The 500 grainer has a better sectional density and BC than the 405's. Over longer distances than 100 yards it might mean something. I think you and your rifle just happen to like 500's, and who could blame you?
(at any rate, we'd have to shoot a lot more Marlins and 405 and 500 grain bullets to 'see', wouldn't we?)
The stabilization theory sounds pretty shaky to me, especially at 100 yards.
'Why Ballisticians Get Grey Hair."
ps, I'd love to see what you do with the Hornady 350s. Lot's of people here use them for elk, and they were always one of my favorite bullets- tougher than the Speer 405, for instance.
munk
misnomer. The 500 grainer has a better sectional density and BC than the 405's. Over longer distances than 100 yards it might mean something. I think you and your rifle just happen to like 500's, and who could blame you?
(at any rate, we'd have to shoot a lot more Marlins and 405 and 500 grain bullets to 'see', wouldn't we?)
The stabilization theory sounds pretty shaky to me, especially at 100 yards.
'Why Ballisticians Get Grey Hair."
ps, I'd love to see what you do with the Hornady 350s. Lot's of people here use them for elk, and they were always one of my favorite bullets- tougher than the Speer 405, for instance.
munk
My buddy has an early production specimen with the porting. LOUD!!! I've heard that Marlin is making the newer ones without that annoyance. Good riddance if it has done so. I'm a huge fan of Micro groove rifling, but wouldn't work all that well with lead bullets.
I've got a '92 winchester clone made by Rossi in .45 Colt. Never owned a lever before and it is now my favorite rifle. Fun to shoot. Anybody who looks down their nose at a lever action is a fool. They are more fun than any bolt action and probably anything short of full auto.
I've got a '92 winchester clone made by Rossi in .45 Colt. Never owned a lever before and it is now my favorite rifle. Fun to shoot. Anybody who looks down their nose at a lever action is a fool. They are more fun than any bolt action and probably anything short of full auto.
My Marlin 45/70 is the old SS with the microgroove. There are recipes for lead, never bothered with them. You need as much bearing surface as possible, which means sticking to the heaviest weight.
The Marlin is accurate. I've always wondered about microgroove.
munk
The Marlin is accurate. I've always wondered about microgroove.
munk
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,178
As much as I get after other people for thread necromancy...
I played around with these a bit on Sunday. No offense, but I didn't choose Hornady for the reputation; I chose them because they were selling the cheapest bullets in .458." The damned bullets alone cost more than many loaded cartridges do.
It was interesting.
From my notes:
350 gr. Hornady SP RN, once- or twice-fired Starline brass. Winchester LR primers. Moderate crimp applied on cannelure with Lee factory crimp die. Ammunition loaded on Lee dies. Powder used was pulled-down WC844 from demilled 5.56mm ammunition; the seller advised me to use H335 load data with it. I used load data from Richard Lee's Modern Reloading, starting with 51.2 grains.
51.2 - 1608, 1650, 1673, 1647, 1647.
51.5 - data lost
52.0 - 1683, 1692, 1702, 1657, 1647. Avg. 1676.
52.5 - 1691, 1642, 1647, 1673, 1675...and one hell of a fireball at the muzzle. I mean, whoa. It got everyone's attention real fast. The report was also considerably louder on each shot, although there was no noticable difference in recoil. I think that 52 grains is all that little barrel will burn.
Observations:
All loads were equally accurate and turned in groups that looked remarkably similar: POI was several inches above my zero for the cast bullet loads at 100 yards and averaged around 2" vertical by 3" horizontal. Recoil was, erm, brisk, and while shooting off the bench wasn't immediately painful, it was unpleasant. The WC844 is obviously a bit hotter than H335 but if one were to start with the minimum as I did, they wouldn't get into trouble with it. There were slight soot marks on the mouth of the 51.2 loads, with the heavier loads being soot-free; no cases displayed any obvious pressure signs. Lee's load data is known for being on the light side of conservative so this shouldn't be any surprise. Not that it affects me anyway, as 52 seems to be all that I can burn.
Some rough number crunching yields the following data on this load (based on Marlin's 7 lb. figure for their 1895GS):
Recoil energy: 24.7 ft-lbs. @ 15.1 fps
Recoil impulse: 3.53 lbs/sec.
ME: 2182 ft-lbs.
TKO Value: 38
As compared to the hottest 250-grain loading in the 375 H&H in the same book:
Recoil energy: 33.3 ft-lbs. @ 14.6 fps
Recoil impulse: 4.31 lbs/sec
ME: 4046
TKO Value: 36
And the Marlin does it at 3 lbs. less of overall weight, as I estimated my hypothetical H&H at 10 lbs. At 7 lbs., it would kick considerably harder but the other numbers wouldn't change. (Of course, the .375 can apply those numbers much more efficiently at a distance, but I don't want to talk about that right now.)
My goal was to have a sort of "light heavy" in a quick handling format that was accurate, reliable, and capable of taking anything in North America should the need arise, out to 200 yards. I believe that these goals have been met. All that remains to be done is the inevitable tinkering and to, you know, go and take something. I'll get to that when I get to that.
munk said:
I played around with these a bit on Sunday. No offense, but I didn't choose Hornady for the reputation; I chose them because they were selling the cheapest bullets in .458." The damned bullets alone cost more than many loaded cartridges do.
It was interesting.
From my notes:
350 gr. Hornady SP RN, once- or twice-fired Starline brass. Winchester LR primers. Moderate crimp applied on cannelure with Lee factory crimp die. Ammunition loaded on Lee dies. Powder used was pulled-down WC844 from demilled 5.56mm ammunition; the seller advised me to use H335 load data with it. I used load data from Richard Lee's Modern Reloading, starting with 51.2 grains.
51.2 - 1608, 1650, 1673, 1647, 1647.
51.5 - data lost
52.0 - 1683, 1692, 1702, 1657, 1647. Avg. 1676.
52.5 - 1691, 1642, 1647, 1673, 1675...and one hell of a fireball at the muzzle. I mean, whoa. It got everyone's attention real fast. The report was also considerably louder on each shot, although there was no noticable difference in recoil. I think that 52 grains is all that little barrel will burn.
Observations:
All loads were equally accurate and turned in groups that looked remarkably similar: POI was several inches above my zero for the cast bullet loads at 100 yards and averaged around 2" vertical by 3" horizontal. Recoil was, erm, brisk, and while shooting off the bench wasn't immediately painful, it was unpleasant. The WC844 is obviously a bit hotter than H335 but if one were to start with the minimum as I did, they wouldn't get into trouble with it. There were slight soot marks on the mouth of the 51.2 loads, with the heavier loads being soot-free; no cases displayed any obvious pressure signs. Lee's load data is known for being on the light side of conservative so this shouldn't be any surprise. Not that it affects me anyway, as 52 seems to be all that I can burn.
Some rough number crunching yields the following data on this load (based on Marlin's 7 lb. figure for their 1895GS):
Recoil energy: 24.7 ft-lbs. @ 15.1 fps
Recoil impulse: 3.53 lbs/sec.
ME: 2182 ft-lbs.
TKO Value: 38
As compared to the hottest 250-grain loading in the 375 H&H in the same book:
Recoil energy: 33.3 ft-lbs. @ 14.6 fps
Recoil impulse: 4.31 lbs/sec
ME: 4046
TKO Value: 36
And the Marlin does it at 3 lbs. less of overall weight, as I estimated my hypothetical H&H at 10 lbs. At 7 lbs., it would kick considerably harder but the other numbers wouldn't change. (Of course, the .375 can apply those numbers much more efficiently at a distance, but I don't want to talk about that right now.)
My goal was to have a sort of "light heavy" in a quick handling format that was accurate, reliable, and capable of taking anything in North America should the need arise, out to 200 yards. I believe that these goals have been met. All that remains to be done is the inevitable tinkering and to, you know, go and take something. I'll get to that when I get to that.
Dave Rishar said:
Paul Mathews is a fan of the Hornady 350 gr. but claims to have gotten about the same results with cast bullets in that weight class. If they weren't so expensive I would use more of them, but mainly shoot 300 gr. RNF from a Saeco 4-cavity mold. A card wad under the bullet pretty well eliminates leading.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,178
I'm not sure how the barrel will do with that. The fastest I've gone with cast bullets thus far is 1200 fps. I don't really know just how hard my alloy is but after heat treating (i.e. I drop directly from the mold into water), it clinks instead of clunks and can't be marked with a fingernail. The same alloy doesn't lead in the Winnie but it's not a fair comparison: the Winnie's barrel is mirror smooth while sections of the Marlin's look like rumble strips on the road.
Hard alloy, alox for lube...it might work. My 300-gr mold has thus far refused to throw decent bullets but I'm working on it. When I get a batch of keepers I'll try driving them with smokeless loads to see what happens. You never know until you try, right?
Speaking of which, one experiment that I keep meaning to try and putting off is shooting pure (or nearly pure) lead bullets through the Winnie, as it seems nearly impossible to lead the thing and the terminal effects of a 300 grain .429" pure lead flatnose ambling along at 1500 fps would be considerable. The only thing holding me back is that so far, it has refused to shoot cast bullets up to my ability to hold.
More projects to put off for later. It's a good thing that I'm planning on living forever, as I will probably need to in order to get everything done that I want to get done.
Munk, a larger dose of WC844 likely wouldn't fix my problems. Anything hotter than 52.0 grains of it seems to produce the same velocity -- it just adds to the fireball. There are other powders that would be better but the WC844 is ~$7-8 per pound and I already have eight pounds of it. Cost wins in this case. (Pardon the pun.)
Hard alloy, alox for lube...it might work. My 300-gr mold has thus far refused to throw decent bullets but I'm working on it. When I get a batch of keepers I'll try driving them with smokeless loads to see what happens. You never know until you try, right?
Speaking of which, one experiment that I keep meaning to try and putting off is shooting pure (or nearly pure) lead bullets through the Winnie, as it seems nearly impossible to lead the thing and the terminal effects of a 300 grain .429" pure lead flatnose ambling along at 1500 fps would be considerable. The only thing holding me back is that so far, it has refused to shoot cast bullets up to my ability to hold.
More projects to put off for later. It's a good thing that I'm planning on living forever, as I will probably need to in order to get everything done that I want to get done.
Munk, a larger dose of WC844 likely wouldn't fix my problems. Anything hotter than 52.0 grains of it seems to produce the same velocity -- it just adds to the fireball. There are other powders that would be better but the WC844 is ~$7-8 per pound and I already have eight pounds of it. Cost wins in this case. (Pardon the pun.)
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2005
- Messages
- 880
Coincidentaly, I have been working with a recently acquired, good used Ruger No 1 in.45/70. Remington 300 grain HP's and 405 grain FP's are solid performers with 2" to 2.25" groups at 100 yards (maybe not minute of angle, but most certainly minute of whitetail, considering the drop past 200 yards). Much more interesting was the Winchester Supreme 300 gr. Nosler Partition, with groups from 0.7" to 1.25" at 100 yards, modest kick and 1800 fps. This was with a vintage 3X Leupold M8 with a Post reticle).
If you really want to explore the limits of your guide gun, check out the ammo at garrettcartridges.com. Bison and bear beware....
If you really want to explore the limits of your guide gun, check out the ammo at garrettcartridges.com. Bison and bear beware....
"so by the time next deer season came around I was using the Hornady 350 grain bullet backed by 55 grains of 4198"
"When hunting deer I am fully committed to having a bullet that gives rapid expansion, plus deep penetration to reach the vitals on an on-end shot. The 350 grain Hornady delivered such performance and I believe the same performance can be derived from a cast bullet."
Paul Mathews, 40 years with the 45/70
Load data the responsibility of the reader. check your loads. Not suitable for any other firearm than the Ruger #1 or #3
munk
"When hunting deer I am fully committed to having a bullet that gives rapid expansion, plus deep penetration to reach the vitals on an on-end shot. The 350 grain Hornady delivered such performance and I believe the same performance can be derived from a cast bullet."
Paul Mathews, 40 years with the 45/70
Load data the responsibility of the reader. check your loads. Not suitable for any other firearm than the Ruger #1 or #3
munk
Munk, a larger dose of WC844 likely wouldn't fix my problems. Anything hotter than 52.0 grains of it seems to produce the same velocity -- it just adds to the fireball. There are other powders that would be better but the WC844 is ~$7-8 per pound and I already have eight pounds of it. Cost wins in this case. (Pardon the pun.)>>>> Dave Rishar
the law of diminishing returns. More fireball, recoil, and deteriorated accuracy. Who says high pressure is a good thing?
There really is in life a place for the 'right' amount.
munk
the law of diminishing returns. More fireball, recoil, and deteriorated accuracy. Who says high pressure is a good thing?
There really is in life a place for the 'right' amount.
munk
It seems to me Paul Matthews quotes Elmer Keith someplace in one of his books as saying "You can't get enough IMR 3031 into a 45/70 case to blow up an '86 Winchester." IIRC Winchester was very adverse to this statement, but it appears to hold true for Marlins also. I have difficulty squeezing a bullet down on top of some of the max 3031 loads Hornady lists, and usually put in quite a bit less just to get the bullet to seat. 3031 seems to be the "idiot proof" powder for the 45/70, and that is mainly what I use.
Another odd thing that Matthews claimed which I found to be true is that soft bullets cast of pure lead do not foul the bore excessively and do not fragment on game at 45/70 velocities. My partner has quit using them because he thinks they are "too" destructive.
Another odd thing that Matthews claimed which I found to be true is that soft bullets cast of pure lead do not foul the bore excessively and do not fragment on game at 45/70 velocities. My partner has quit using them because he thinks they are "too" destructive.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2005
- Messages
- 880
Munk, I see you quoting Paul Matthews 
I too have his book. It's a gem, and the reason I sought out the used Ruger No 1.
I too have his book. It's a gem, and the reason I sought out the used Ruger No 1.I've liked him ever since his article in a old Gun Digest, something like, "Once again I get a new deer rifle, and once again I say to hell with the experts and pick a 375 H&H for deer."
If you look at the guy, he's a little smaller than I am, and running all around the countryside after game with his handloads and theories about bullet size, mass, equilibrium, sectional density....what's not to like? Another gun nut. Pretty much my tribe.
munk
If you look at the guy, he's a little smaller than I am, and running all around the countryside after game with his handloads and theories about bullet size, mass, equilibrium, sectional density....what's not to like? Another gun nut. Pretty much my tribe.
munk
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2005
- Messages
- 880
When the entrance hole is already .458 or even .375, one does not have to worry much about expansion and a blood trail. More than likely you'll have all you need.