45-70 load data versus 45-70

Azar · Member Joined: Jan 04, 2010 Posts: 275 Location: Utah

Aloysius,

If you have access to it I'd suggest picking up a copy of Lyman's Cast Bullet Handbook. They have the three load levels listed for the .45-70: 1873 Springfield / Remington Rolling Blocks / Sharps / & Replicas (18,000 CUP), 1886 Winchester & 1895 Marlin (28,000 CUP), Ruger #1 & Ruger #3 (40,000 CUP). They also have a large selection of load data for a large variety of bullet weights.

As for hunting bullets, I've never hunted with cast bullets before. From those Gunwriters I trust who do they nearly universally recommend a round nose flat point (RNFP) as they say it tends to be more devastating on game. Maybe the Lyman #457193 405gr?

Good luck and keep us updated.

Aloysius · Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:41 am Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

I know, these 3 levels are also mentioned in their Reloading Handbook.

And I'll try to get Accurate 5744. That might be the right stuff. This 27,0 grs might give me the velocity I have in mind and if it's also making decent groupes... it seems to give all the benefits everyone is talking about, it even follows Mr. Lee's advice not to use powder with a fast burning rate.

Azar · Member Joined: Jan 04, 2010 Posts: 275 Location: Utah

Sounds like a good plan!

pete4d · Posted: Sun May 21, 2017 6:46 pm Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Aloysius wrote:

I know, these 3 levels are also mentioned in their Reloading Handbook.

And I'll try to get Accurate 5744. That might be the right stuff. This 27,0 grs might give me the velocity I have in mind and if it's also making decent groupes... it seems to give all the benefits everyone is talking about, it even follows Mr. Lee's advice not to use powder with a fast burning rate.

www.loaddata.com/loads...loads.html

Try these too many to lest

Aloysius · Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 3:51 am Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Pete, you get the yellow jacket (hope you are familiar with the "tour de France")

I think I have to beg for some extra years because now I expect my life is too short to try them all...

by the way: because I still didn't get any Acurate 5744, I went to the range last Sunday with reloads using 29 till 33 grs N120 (Vithavuori) behind a lead pill of +/- 410 grs. Only got 1 knock on my nose again and even with such warning I got so much confidence in these loads that I allready took the Marlin out on the high seat. But even with a good rifle and decent reloads you should first see roebuck befor you can shoot it... so the story still continues...

EDIT: now I had a closer look at the site and it looks promishing, but at this moment I'm not going to pay extra money till I have tried the data I've already on my hands. So that site stays in the back of my head till I realy need it.

gelandangan · Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 3:57 pm Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

After losing (read - did not shoot due to unethical distance vs trajectory) a few nice goats, I forgo the subsonic loads on my 45-70.
My current load for 45-70 is using 46.3gn of AR2206H on 330 soft gas check hollow point.
This give respectable trajectory (an elongated rainbow Smile

) and plenty accurate on my H&R Buff classic.
The recoil is not too bad either.

Aloysius · Posted: Tue May 23, 2017 4:58 am Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Geland, where should I place your powder in the burning rate chart? When you are using 46,3 grs it should be rather slow. Any idea about the velocity?

and recoil: maybe my nose is longer than yours? Smile

I know that's not the reason why I have this nose-thingy now. What can you expect when the rules on your range changes from "everything allowed" to "pussy-calibers"? Then you forget the cheek-butstock contact (or maybe it's just the weight of the years coming with old age)

Donut Slayer · Posted: Tue May 23, 2017 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

H4198 here. 35gr has little recoil with 300gr lead bullets and are accurate for me. For hunting I use jacketed 300gr with 48gr and its just under 2k fps. Anything much more than that and its really painful to shoot off the bench.

Vince · Posted: Tue May 23, 2017 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Aloysius wrote:

Geland, where should I place your powder in the burning rate chart? When you are using 46,3 grs it should be rather slow. Any idea about the velocity?

and recoil: maybe my nose is longer than yours? Smile

I know that's not the reason why I have this nose-thingy now. What can you expect when the rules on your range changes from "everything allowed" to "pussy-calibers"? Then you forget the cheek-butstock contact (or maybe it's just the weight of the years coming with old age)

Aloys, check out this link mate. You will find AR2206H at #171 on the list of powders.

Reloaders Nest - Powder Burn Rates

Aloysius · Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 4:02 am Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Vince, that's very close to my favorit powder PCl507 (which is no longer produced...)
so I guess it's also excellent in the .308 Win and the .222 Rem?

gelandangan · Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 4:13 pm Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Aloysius wrote:

Geland, where should I place your powder in the burning rate chart? When you are using 46,3 grs it should be rather slow. Any idea about the velocity?

and recoil: maybe my nose is longer than yours? Smile

I know that's not the reason why I have this nose-thingy now. What can you expect when the rules on your range changes from "everything allowed" to "pussy-calibers"? Then you forget the cheek-butstock contact (or maybe it's just the weight of the years coming with old age)

The velocity is somewhere about 1700 fps.

Re. nose, if you look at my avatar which has quite a resemblance to my face, my nose is not exactly small.

Sadly my local (within 30 kilometers) range do not allow 45-70 to be used.
I have to go to a range about 100 km away to test loads, that or go to a farm.
I can't even test velocity in the state forest!!

Aloysius · Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 11:09 pm Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

And doesn't your local range allow the use of black powder?
Sometimes you have to be very inventive to keep an old car running...

and 1700 fps, that's more than 500 m/s... with a soft lead bullet? I think I have to investigate my limits. But I'm recently not using a gascheck. I'm using a waxed/oiled beer-carton cut in the right diameter instead (just as I used to do in my Parker Hale Volunteer black powder rifle). Till now no signs of leading...

Elvis · Last edited by Elvis on Thu May 25, 2017 9:52 pm; edited 1 time in total

2206 is awesome in the .223 as well. hodgdon 4895 I believe is the same stuff,it will be on the adi site. Cool

there ya go fixeded it Cool

gelandangan · Posted: Thu May 25, 2017 2:08 am Post subject: Re: 45-70 load data versus 45-70

Aloysius wrote:

And doesn't your local range allow the use of black powder?
Sometimes you have to be very inventive to keep an old car running...

and 1700 fps, that's more than 500 m/s... with a soft lead bullet? I think I have to investigate my limits. But I'm recently not using a gascheck. I'm using a waxed/oiled beer-carton cut in the right diameter instead (just as I used to do in my Parker Hale Volunteer black powder rifle). Till now no signs of leading...

I use gas check - it is easier.

The ranges do not care what propellant used, the caliber is the bottle neck.
It does not make sense but such is life.

Azar · Member Joined: Jan 04, 2010 Posts: 275 Location: Utah

Elvis wrote:

2206 is awesome in the .223 as well. hodgdon 4831 I believe is the same stuff,it will be on the adi site.

AR2206 = Hodgdon H4895 (which is indeed a great .223 powder)
AR2213 = Hodgdon H4831 (which is WAY to slow to be useful in the .223) Very Happy