Especially compared to the versatility of .44 Magnum? Of course, I get it if you’re hunting elephants or velociraptors, but does it really have a place on reasonable uses in North America? And if so, does it really out perform the .44 ballistically by that much?

Yes. It’s a handy, powerful package. I ran my department’s rifle qual with my 1895, but I will admit, it would have been easier with a pistol caliber rifle.

That must have cost you $100.

I think 44 will do 90% of what folks think they need a 45-70 for in North America. Elk, moose, and grizzly would warrant 45-70 but that’s very few instances.

If you reload for 45-70 there isn’t as big a cost gap, if you have the 44 mag companion gun then maybe you wanna go that route.

I already have the 45-70 and reload for it so for me it’s whatever you have now works. If u was buying again it would be 6 to one, half dozen yo the other.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
That must have cost you $100.

I reload, so it wasn’t that bad.

I agree with Otto. Unless you're shooting really big game or defending against Grizz, the .44 will handle 90% of what you might need a levergun for.

The magnum pistol cartridges get a big boost in velocity from the longer barrels over what you see out of a handgun. A 240 or 300gr .44 Mag out of a 16 or 18" barrel will deliver quite a thump, and with the right bullets will penetrate feet of tissue.

The .45-70 gives you more powder and heavier pills, but at what point does having the ability to shoot all the way through your target 2 or 3 times start to become excessive?

I'd be confident in my .44 for anything east of the Mississippi. It would probably be enough out west, too, but the extra whallop of the .45-70 is welcome when there are monsters that want to eat me. It's not really welcome any other time, though...it's pretty brutal.

And yeah, reloading is a must if you're going to shoot .45-70. It doesn't hurt for .44 Mag, either.

I agree with Otto, an 92, most of the time 45-70 is a lot more than you need. I do t know that I would have one if we didn’t have bears up here.

I had a lever action 45-70 and hated it. The only gun I have owned that I can clearly say I hated. My .300wsm is more than capable of any hunting or defensive situation I would possibly find myself involved in anywhere. A 45-70 is a short range canon. Might as well light it off with a torch. No need for a trigger

I get that some love it. But what is point of shooting light loads through one. I don't get that.

I don't know if it makes sense or not. I think a lot of that depends on what you want the gun for.I don't hunt and am in no way tactical or competitive. But I like guns and have a Browning replica of an 1886 Winchester in .45-70. The one they made before they put the safety on them. I take it to the range once in a while. But I have no rational reason to have it, other than I like it. The only justification I have is that I like guns and enjoy having them. It may not make sense to any one else, but it makes perfect sense to me.

No lever action .45-70 here, but I have an original Springfield Trapdoor rifle that is a pleasure to shoot. I also enjoy a Winchester Model 1886 lever action .45-90 and an original Sharps in .45 Express (.45-105).

I've been using all of them for many years and have taken several Colorado mule deer and Rocky Mountain elk over the years.

I load all of my own ammunition and cast my own bullets. Cost is very comparable to any modern hunting rifle, and cast bullets keep my costs down well below anything using factory-made jacketed bullets.

I treat those old antiques gently, moderate charges for moderate pressures. Even so, the terminal performance on large animals is quite impressive. The only significant limitation is trajectory, the big heavy blunt bullets are not what I would choose for long range shooting.

Try it, you might like it a lot.

For most people, no.
For non handloaders, no.
For people who are going to shoot it a lot, no.

Choice between shooting a critter with one or the other, .45-70 all day long.


(I say for non handloader in regards to ammo cost)

I love 45-70. You don't need big bear stomping loads in it, but it's nice that they are around as an option should T-Rex suddenly return.

I don't hunt any more, but back when I did a long shot in my part of the country was 75 yards. Even the light black powder level loadings would flatten a deer at that range and not damage much meat. I occasionally shot the hot stuff out of my Guide Gun and while it was stiff it wasn't unmanageable.

Is it a choice for everyone? No. For most folks a 44 magnum carbine will give you similar performance to mid level loads. Does it make sense? Sure as long as your needs are met by a cartridge with a relatively short range and you either reload or are willing to accept the cost of commercial ammo.

After all of that, the only pure hunting rifle left in my safe is a Marlin Guide Gun in 45-70. I haven't hunted in almost 30 years now, but it's still there just in case I suddenly get the itch. Or if big bears move south. Or dinosaurs come back. It costs more than 44 magnum, but a heck of a lot less than 458 Win Mag.

If you're planning on manning a security outpost at Jurassic Park, accept no substitutes. It's the only caliber specified as being suitable for T-Rex.



But personally, if it came down to T-Rex defense, I'd skip over .45-70 lever rifle and go straight to one of the McCann Industries M1 Garand conversions in .458 Win Mag.

5 rounds of 500 grain .458 Win Mag in a semiauto package. One of those rounds could kill a T-Rex plus the Stegosaurus behind it.




All kidding aside... No, .45-70 doesn't make much practical sense these days, especially when it comes to hunting North American game specifically. A bolt action rifle in any of the stouter modern hunting calibers will do anything a .45-70 does on North American game, and more, usually with better range/trajectory/accuracy and often cheaper cost per round either new or reloaded.

Heck, even the venerable .30-06 can take any North American game, especially with heavier 200+ grain loads for the bigger ones like Elk/Moose/Bear.

But if you've just got the itch for a lever gun with a big thumper round, then .45-70 is likely the one you want. But .450 Marlin is another one to consider there, as basically a modernized .45-70 with a little extra power and better velocity/trajectory, though I don't think it'd be any cheaper to buy/load than .45-70.

Or just get a .450 Bushmaster/.458 SOCOM upper for one of your ARs to scratch that .45 caliber thumper itch. Those basically approximate .45-70 ballistics, just in a smaller cartridge that's compatible with the AR platform, with less felt recoil, and they're usually cheaper to buy/load than .45-70 too.

Yes, 45-70’s ballistics are superior to 44 Mag’s ballistics at all ranges. The same could be said for 30-30 and 35 Rem, since the question is about lever actions.

Last time I had mine at the 200yard range, I was 10 for 10 on a 9” paper plate with an Aimpoint T-1. It was on sale for less than the H-1.

On deer, the Hornady LEVERevolution didn’t expand the two times I used it; just a hole all the way through both deer. The one hit both lungs and severed the top of the heart. That deer ran 90 yards into the woods. The other hit both lungs and that deer ran 40 yards into the swamp. The deer I hit with a 7mm REM Mag didn’t go anywhere. One entrance hole and the lungs were obliterated.

I shot a hog with 44 mag. I just grazed its head with the first shot and it took off. I was trying to hit it behind the ear at 40 yards with irons. With the second shot, I aimed for its snout and got him in the shoulder. Unfortunately, I had to deliver a coup de grace. That same trip, my dad shot his hog with a 45-70. It was facing my dad and the bullet penetrated almost 2’. His hog died quickly.

Would 44 mag have been better on my deer than 45-70? I think at best, it would have been the same. I’m sure 45-70 out performs 44 mag on hogs.

We’re talking lever action. I mentioned the deer I shot with the 7mm REM Mag bolt gun because there are better bullet choices in bolt guns.

I had my Marlin before the movie, but my Sharps replica after the other movie. The 1,000 yard range is on the bucket list.

I had a .45-70 lever for a while. Wonderful.

You need just decide your level of murder. Loads of people reading this can actually get the job done with .357, some folks need .44.

Unless angry busses are trying to kick your door in, or you have specific hunting needs... .45-70 is overkill because we're not trying to hunt bison to extinction anymore.

Lever Revolution... if'n you're gonna .45-70..

I have 2, a modern Henry and an older ‘trap-door’. No doubt, bigger bullets, but many loadings are kinda mild. Most reloading manuals have 3 pressure levels of 45-70 loads. That could go from the older guns to the very strongest.

The Ruger Model 1 is a top one for high end loads. The one writer said you can safely go to ‘unshootable’ levels, for the average shooter.

Not that one has to go straight to max anyway.

I would think for just kicking around, a 44 or 357/38 would be more useful, especially with the non-reloader.

If I was in an area where the AR was not allowed, a higher capacity 357 or 44 mag could fill the slot.

Yes it makes sense in the same way 16" guns make sense on an Iowa class battleship. Most of the real work gets done by destroyers and cruisers, but there are those times...

Only reason I have my 45-70 is it was a marlin made guide gun with factory porting. Somebody had paid a good amount to add DRC sights and have a scout mount drilled and tapped and added a Leopold scope. Picked it all up for about the price of the scope.
It’s fun to shoot and one day I’ll smack a deer or pig with it and FL is talking about openings. Bear season and we have one that prowls the neighborhood and we’ve seen him in our back woods so there’s that.

To be honest I take my 44 mag lever much more often to the range.

I used to shoot BPCR and I agree the .45-70 is a short range proposition best limited to 600 yards. The serious long range shooters were shooting something bigger like a .45 x 2 7/8"(.45-100 in Winchesterspeak).

My .38-55 wasn't knocking down all the 46 lb 500 meter metallic silhouette rams, so I went to a .40-65. Adequate power, less recoil than a .45-XX

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
On deer, the Hornady LEVERevolution didn’t expand the two times I used it; just a hole all the way through both deer.

I've had a similar experience. 45 caliber hole going in and a 45 caliber hole going out. I went to soft points and they expand much better.

quote:

The 1,000 yard range is on the bucket list.

I've been itching to take my Shiloh out to the Quigley shoot for a number of years. Never been able to make it work though. Someday.