I find it interesting that the 45-70 was designed for infantry because it is such a large cartridge

45-70 was basically putting a Kentucky long rifle load into a brass case for faster reloading. Small caliber high velocity ammunition was not yet a practical reality at the time because smokeless power had yet to be invented, so in its day 45 caliber was actually a normal bore size for a rifle. Most frontiersman in the early 1800's would have carried a muzzle loading rifle around 40-54 caliber for hunting and such.

I'm sure after using the .58 caliber Model 1861, soldiers felt that the .45/70 was the 5.56 of the 1870's.

AlexanderA said:

The .45-70 was somewhere in the middle of this progression

Click to expand...

Which had some digressions along the way. Like the 1890 6mm Lee, or the 6.5 calimers in the early decades of the 1900s.
But, the point is well made.

jmr40 said:

The 45-70 replaced a 58 caliber rifle. It was a huge step down in size and power, the original poodle shooter.

Click to expand...

The 500 gr. bullet from a 45-70 was a step down in size but a step up in power. A 500 gr. bullet at 1300 FPS has more energy that the same weight minie ball at 1000. And infinitely more penetration and range.

entropy said:

The main problem at the Little Big Horn was Custer's ego.

Click to expand...

That, and the fact that his men were issued copper cased, inside primed ammunition that tended to stick in the chamber when the gun got hot.

CapnMac said:

Which had some digressions along the way. Like the 1890 6mm Lee...

Click to expand...

The 6mm Lee has essentially identical ballistics from duty weapons as the trendy new hotness- 6mm ARC.

tark said:

The 500 gr. bullet from a 45-70 was a step down in size but a step up in power. A 500 gr. bullet at 1300 FPS has more energy that the same weight minie ball at 1000. And infinitely more penetration and range.

That, and the fact that his men were issued copper cased, inside primed ammunition that tended to stick in the chamber when the gun got hot.

Click to expand...

And the fact that the Indians were well equipped with repeating rifles...

jmr40 said:

The truth is that it was not all that successful, nor popular. O

Click to expand...

On what do you base this statement? The 45-70 was very popular until the advent of smokless powder.

I'm sure after using the .58 caliber Model 1861, soldiers
felt that the .45/70 was the 5.56 of the 1870's.

Click to expand...

500gr at 1200fps
- 69 Charleville
- 58 Springfield
- 45-70
- 12ga 1⅛ Clays Load . . .

... all the same
(actually, a the military loading of the Brown Bess is the one that will rock you back a bit....)

DocRock said:

And the fact that the Indians were well equipped with repeating rifles..

Click to expand...

That is the biggest myths of the entire battle. Very few Indians had firearms at all, and those who did carried an assortment of muzzle loaders and single shots. There were a handful of repeaters and the 73 winchester in the picture is one such rifle. These four rifles were Indian weapons used in the actual battle. They are in the Rock Island Arsenal Museum.

Custer lost because it was thousands against hundreds.

MEHavey said:

500gr at 1200fps
- 69 Charleville
- 58 Springfield
- 45-70
- 12ga 1⅛ Clays Load . . .

... all the same
(actually, a the military loading of the Brown Bess is the one that will rock you back a bit....)

Click to expand...

The standard musket charge was 60 grains of powder. Pretty sure that's not enough to push a minie ball at 1200 FPS. I got just under 1000 when I chronographed my 1863 replica

jmr40 said:

Hunters found it inadequate for game bigger than deer.

Click to expand...

That is the most ridiculous statement I have heard in a long time. A 500 gr lead bullet in front of 70 gr. of FFG will shoot entirely through a 2000lb. buffalo, from any angle, as long as a large bone is not hit. This has been reported by Clint Smith and Mike Venturino and those two have killed their share of buffalo.

Either you need to learn more about the subject or you're trolling. If the latter, do it somewhere else.

tark said:

That is the biggest myths of the entire battle. Very few Indians had firearms at all, and those who did carried an assortment of muzzle loaders and single shots. There were a handful of repeaters and the 73 winchester in the picture is one such rifle. These four rifles were Indian weapons used in the actual battle. They are in the Rock Island Arsenal Museum.

Custer lost because it was thousands against hundreds.

Click to expand...

Well, you are wrong. National Geographic has done battlefield forensics and based on spent brass found have made solid estimates of no less than 134 different rifles, over half of which were repeaters, in Indian hands. One Indian rifle for every two 7th Cavalry troops and scouts killed.”Ghosts on the Little Bighorn” Apr. 1986. Search. If you have evidence to the contrary, present.

up until WW1 or so, militaries needed to find the means to keep going along the path. With civilization largely ending with 1000 miles from where the land ends, your going to need the means to keep going without support.
No doubt the "what's really needed to fight a bear" argument was a thing back then.

You must not have read the Smithsonian report that I did. The one I read backed up my claims.

tark said:

You must not have read the Smithsonian report that I did. The one I read backed up my claims.

Click to expand...

My mistake. National Geographic. Source cited above. Show me yours.

I just did. And I wouldn't have much faith in the National Geographic's historical research on anything. They are a bunch of tree hugging dirt worshippers with an agenda. I base most of my knowledge of the battle on the three historians that work on Arsenal Island, one of which has visited the battle site many times and done extensive research on the battle. His name is Kevin Braflaadt ( Norwegan ) and he is a Captain in the army reserves.

DocRock said:

Well, you are wrong. National Geographic has done battlefield forensics and based on spent brass found have made solid estimates of no less than 134 different rifles, over half of which were repeaters, in Indian hands. One Indian rifle for every two 7th Cavalry troops and scouts killed.”Ghosts on the Little Bighorn” Apr. 1986. Search. If you have evidence to the contrary, present.

Click to expand...

The battle field forensics, made possible by a fire that burnt the grass away, also found that Trapdoors only jammed a very small percentage of the time. Very few cases were found that had been pried out of the chambers. That myth was just another excuse for Custer's failure.

standard musket charge was 60 grains of powder. Pretty sure that's
not enough to push a minie ball at 1200 FPS. I got just under 1000 ...

Click to expand...

You are correct. My LabRadar showed 998fps (ave) with
Lyman 57213 (ThinSkirt) over 3.4cc 3Fg-GoEX.
Which of course makes it a relative pussy cat.

Ugly Sauce said:

The battle field forensics, made possible by a fire that burnt the grass away, also found that Trapdoors only jammed a very small percentage of the time. Very few cases were found that had been pried out of the chambers. That myth was just another excuse for Custer's failure.

Click to expand...

It was not a myth, the copper cases were widely hated by the soldiers and every book I have ever read on trapdoors mentioned the problems with the copper cases. We have a few of those copper cases on display at the arsenal museum and they show evidence of having been pried loose from the gun. After the battle (and after brass cases were substituted for the copper ones) It was found that a well trained soldier was not at any great disadvantage when armed with the trapdoor Springfield vs. a repeating rifle, because when the repeating rifle ran out of ammo it took a half of a minute or more to reload it. The soldier with the trapdoor could get off an aimed shot every 4-5 seconds. The volume of fire for any given time period was roughly equal.

Custer was an arrogant jerk, agreed, but his men were vastly outnumbered and not equipped with quality ammunition.

MEHavey said:

You are correct. My LabRadar showed 998fps (ave) with
Lyman 57213 (ThinSkirt) over 3.4cc 3Fg-GoEX.
Which of course makes it a relative pussy cat.

Click to expand...

I still wouldn't want to get hit by one! Like having a broom handle shoved through your body.....slowly....

Well, then my question would be, why were/was such a small percentage of cases found with pry marks on them?

It's been around for a long time so it's "got legs"

tark said:

I just did. And I wouldn't have much faith in the National Geographic's historical research on anything. They are a bunch of tree hugging dirt worshippers with an agenda. I base most of my knowledge of the battle on the three historians that work on Arsenal Island, one of which has visited the battle site many times and done extensive research on the battle. His name is Kevin Braflaadt ( Norwegan ) and he is a Captain in the army reserves.

Click to expand...

No, you didn’t. I have provided you a source citation for an actual battlefield forensics study that showed effectively one Indian rifle, many of them repeaters, for every two US cavalry and auxiliaries killed at Little Bighorn. Either you provide a citation to a credible source/study that refutes those findings or all you have is an inflated opinion.