45-70 govt vs 500 smith and wesson

45-70 has many more options for loads. You can get easy on the shoulder cowboy loads to absolute sledgehammers that approach 458 win mag. In a rifle, I can't see what the 500 S&W brings to the table.

in a rifle if it is an either/or decision i'd opt for the 45-70 due to versatility...

But with the .500 you can brag to your buddies that you have a fitty.

.45-70Govt. is much cheaper to feed (whether you reload or not), is more versatile (someone has been developing loads for it to do whatever you want for the last 136 yrs), you can find ammo locally if necessary, and it is not likely to become obsolete for another 136 years or so. Best of all you can put big holes in big mean things (like big angry trash cans filled with water or the past 20yrs of yellow pages)...though ale is right, you can't brag that you gots a fitty.

If you want to brag about having "a fifty", get a muzzle loader and shoot .50 or .54 cal round ball. Its a hoot and you'll learn more about shooting the way our GG grandfathers did it!

45-70, not even a choice really... Much more options in factory and with reloading it breathes fire or rolls them out the bore.

If you want to brag about having "a fifty", get a muzzle loader and shoot .50 or .54 cal round ball.

Click to expand...

I am pretty certain that Ale was joking...and I know that I was. There is no magic that a .50cal can perform that a .458 can't.

To my way of thinking, this is an easy one-- .45-70.
Cheaper up front, cheaper to shoot, cheaper to handload, more applications.
And cooler.

I'm going to say 45/70 but for a diffrent reason than the other posters


Having shot handi rifles in both chamberings let me tell ya that 500 in a 6lb gun with no brake will lay waste to your shoulder. The 45/70 in factory form has more choices in shoulder friendly loads. There's 45/70 loads that range from mild to nuts cvs 500 loads that go from nuts to hyper shoulder mangulation

Mr Bernoulli said:

I was looking at some of those H&R/NEF handi rifles and you can get them chambered in either. I want it for a brush gun for deer drives etc. What would you guys get and what do you think the pros and cons of each are?

Click to expand...

There are many good points here that lean to the 45/70 being the better choice. I asked myself this very question not long ago. I decided on the .500 mainly because I already had that calibre in a revolver and own none chambered in 45/70.

krochus is 100% correct, a hot .500 round in these rifles will rock your world.

Another vote for .45-70. I have two lever guns and find that they are terrific. There are lots of ammo choices out there for you, as noted above, but not just in light and heavy loads, but in a whole range of bullet types from frangible to soft lead, to hard cast, to various jacketed rounds. You can get ball, hollowpoint, soft point, and even plastic tipped spire rounds (Hornady Leverevolution). You can find a loading good for deer, bear, or buffalo.

IMHO, go with the .45-70. The .500 Mag ballistics are good, for a pistol round, but the .45-70 has any number of ammo makers the take it up to almost .458 range.

When you shoot a .45-70, you aren't just shooting any old cartridge, you are shooting history.

Another point...

.45-70 is slightly tapered, even though it's called a "straight wall" cartridge. It will load and extract more easily than a .500 S&W would.

Also, a single shot .45-70 will take a heavier bullet than a .500. You have to look for some more exotic loads than are listed in the Hodgdon manual.

While the .500 S&W is an impressive revolver round, the .45-70 is actually more powerful, in a single-shot rifle. And a long heavy bullet like the ~520 grain Lyman in .45-70 does a serious number on big game, even when backed up with standard 1870s black powder loads.

The only real reason I could see going with the .500 Mag. is if you already have, or want a revolver in that caliber as well. Then you can reload for both. Or if you know someone who has one and you can split the costs for ammo.

Otherwise, its the .45/70 all the way in my mind.

I agree the only reason to get a .500 rifle is if you already have a .500 revolver. But you could get a BFR in 45-70....

45-70 is much more versatile and is one of the easiest calibers to handload.

I wonder what the answers will be in another decade?

The .500 is a relatively young cartridge but there's a few folks that are doing some interesting reloads with them. Some of them will not chamber in the revolver due to having such long bullets. If you look at such rifle specific loads then there's a lot of freedom to develop new bullets and loads for them that can duplicate a lot of the 45-70 loadings. One area that the .500 wins is the size. It's a more compact cartridge to carry. And with today's powders the loss in casing room isn't a concern.

In time and with more load development on the S&W this comparison may not be as sure a slam dunk.

IMHO, go with the .45-70. The .500 Mag ballistics are good, for a pistol round, but the .45-70 has any number of ammo makers the take it up to almost .458 range.

Click to expand...

Absolutely not true

Some super-duper single shot only nuclear loads in 45-70 can reach or slightly exceed 3500-3600 ft/lb, the 458 is around 5500 with some load approaching 6000.

The 45-70 is not an elephant cartridge, no matter what the fanatics say.

Apples and oranges.....

Good question. I've purchased the reloading gear, but have yet to begin developing loads. I believe that the .500S&W round has the potential to compete with the time tested 45/70. We shall see.

Some super-duper single shot only nuclear loads in 45-70 can reach or slightly exceed 3500-3600 ft/lb, the 458 is around 5500 with some load approaching 6000.

Click to expand...

Of course, your use of energy like an ammo marketing piece overstates the real difference, but it's still a big difference.

The .45-70, introduced a quarter century before smokeless powder was common, was never designed for really high pressures. That's one reason the commercial .475 Linebaugh isn't made from cut-down .45-70 brass like the initial experiments.

The .458 WAS designed for high pressures and modern powders.

And the .45-70 wasn't designed for elephants.

Now a lot of the modern hyper loadings of the .45-70 are a bit silly for most applications of the thing, given that the original black powder loadings will put a bullet straight through a buffalo, where it will kill the next one behind it. Large-diameter, heavy, non-expanding bullets don't need the velocity that a smaller, lighter, expanding bullets require for proper expansion and to overcome their lack of momentum.

The problem with the .45-70 is its trajectory. It can be learned, but it isn't easy to learn. .500 S&W, with even less aerodynamic bullets and less velocity, isn't going to make that any easier. And with either round, you don't need any more energy, from a rifle.

Ok folks I have done really long and deep research on the 500 mag and the 45-70. When you look at it both can be rather versital. Both can be loaded with smokeless ot blackpowder. The 500 mag would more or less be a 50-50 with a 350 gr bullet in the blackpowder realm. The 500 in a rifle with modern loads is more equal to a 50-90 sharps loaded with black powder. The 45-70 almost never make it to 50-90 levels with out careful considerations.

In the handi rifle the 500 will make for a sore shoulder. Although the 45-70 would do the same with heavy loads.

reloading, they cost about the same. There is a few more bullets to select from in .458 than .500 The 500 should be a little easier to reload as it has a shorter streight case verses a long tapered case.

Final say from me. If you are concerned with econimics go 45-70 unless you reload. If you relaod consider what you will be shooting. If dangerous game(wild hogs,large cats,african game) in involved go for the .500. If its just for fun go 45-70.

DG by definition is dangerous TO THE HUNTER. I wouldn't choose a handi-rifle for DG.

I'm not so excited about the .50-90. I've seen it have some penetration problems that I didn't expect. Granted, they were on buffalo, but I still saw .45-70 perform a tad better. OTOH, the original Sharps rifle that the guy was using to shoot .50-90 was pretty cool, and still shot well after 135 years.

If you load .45-70 for a single shot, you can use bullets that are as heavy, but longer and skinnier. AFAIK that's what made the Army go from .50 to .45 when the cartridge was first adopted: penetraion -- and trajectory, for the same reason. Therefore, I'd take .45-70 over an ostensible clone of the .50-90.

Of course, the trajectory is still nothing like a modern rifle.