.45-70 scope
- Thread starter agrmsu693
- Start date
- Status
PotatoJudge
Member
For most purposes a fixed 2 or 4 power rifle scope from any of the big makers (Leupold, Nikon, Burris, Weaver) would be a good option.
Quick Karl
member
I have a Marlin 1895 CB 45-70 which I love. I switch between a William's Target Foolproof peep sight (you'd be amazed how much crisper the front sight will look through a peep sight) and a Leupold 2-7 Rifleman which is very affordable, rock solid, crystal clear, and covered by Leupold's great warranty.
It's the perfect scope given the limited range of even the hottest 45-70 loadings... 250-yards is a long shot with a 45-70 due to the 'rainbow' trajectory of the round.
It's the perfect scope given the limited range of even the hottest 45-70 loadings... 250-yards is a long shot with a 45-70 due to the 'rainbow' trajectory of the round.
I put a low-power variable on mine.
I chose a 1.5-4.5x, with the idea that the bigger, more ornery critters I hunt may fill up a scope's field of view pretty darned quickly...
As an aside with respect for the .45-70 and "rainbow trajectories", I'm starting to think we as shooters are getting lazy in this day and age. My 32" Sharps has more than enough energy to reliably and consistently drop deer-sized game at 400+ yards, and that's loaded with 70gr of BP and a 535gr cast boolit zipping along at a blistering 1200fps. Our shooting forefathers from 100+ years ago knew their range and holdovers to the dinner-on-the-hoof, using the same vernier sight setup I currently use to hunt and silhouette shoot. Granted, nobody's forcing a .45-70 shooter to make shots they're not comfortable with, but we should really refrain from broad brush strokes and generalizations. The ".45-70 is a 200-yard cartridge" sounds just like the oft-repeated "brush gun" misconception.
I chose a 1.5-4.5x, with the idea that the bigger, more ornery critters I hunt may fill up a scope's field of view pretty darned quickly...
As an aside with respect for the .45-70 and "rainbow trajectories", I'm starting to think we as shooters are getting lazy in this day and age. My 32" Sharps has more than enough energy to reliably and consistently drop deer-sized game at 400+ yards, and that's loaded with 70gr of BP and a 535gr cast boolit zipping along at a blistering 1200fps. Our shooting forefathers from 100+ years ago knew their range and holdovers to the dinner-on-the-hoof, using the same vernier sight setup I currently use to hunt and silhouette shoot. Granted, nobody's forcing a .45-70 shooter to make shots they're not comfortable with, but we should really refrain from broad brush strokes and generalizations. The ".45-70 is a 200-yard cartridge" sounds just like the oft-repeated "brush gun" misconception.
Cosmoline
Member
Not only is the .45-70 a "rainbow trajectory" round, these days the loads cover a huge range from cowboy to safari. All of which have different trajectories. I think you're much better off with a tangent or one of the three-leaf safari sights Buf. Arms sells. You can calibrate the leafs to your own particular set of loads.
Scopes are overused and overrated. You really do not need them to hunt.
Scopes are overused and overrated. You really do not need them to hunt.
hamourkiller
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
- Messages
- 215
The absolute best heavy recoiling rifle scope is the VX-III 1.5x5 Leupold scope.
This scope has very generous eye relief and eye placement is not critical.
Also when you adjust to about 2.5 power or so it is very fast on target, no open sight can compete with this set up.
I would recomend the Express cowboy sights from XS sights and the Leupold quick on-off base and ring system.
Have fun with the 45-70!
This scope has very generous eye relief and eye placement is not critical.
Also when you adjust to about 2.5 power or so it is very fast on target, no open sight can compete with this set up.
I would recomend the Express cowboy sights from XS sights and the Leupold quick on-off base and ring system.
Have fun with the 45-70!
Quick Karl
member
It's not the 1800's and there are far better cartridges for longer range shots - I personally prefer a solid cheek-weld as opposed to placing my chin on the stock when using a tang sight for a very long range shot.
In target shooting scenarios where the risk of wounding an animal is not a concern, I too can make the long shots, I’m just not willing to risk wounding an animal to prove it.
And remember, Quigley is just a movie character, no one is making 1,000-yard standing offhand shots on a water-bucket.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
We don't really NEED anything other than a front stuffer do we?
That is the concept of the low mag power, forward mounted scout optics. Very fast acquisition for targets that might pop up quickly.
And franky some folks have poor eyesight and irons just don't work for them. I go back and forth depending on where I am hunting but to just say skip the optics isn't really fair.
I get that. Now look at the picture in the post I quoted. Doesn't look much like an IER scope to me.
A .45-70 does not have a flat trajectory, but it hits hard. It is an optimal cartridge for two things: closer shots on large and/or dangerous animals, and long-range shots where you can take your time and compensate for the drop. Either way, it's not a varmint round, and absolute accuracy is secondary when you're shooting really big game.
And no, you don't shoot buckets offhand at 1000 yards. You may, however, shoot buffalo with shooting sticks at 300... For which the .45-70 works as well as it did 130 years ago, with the same sights.
The IER scope is a wonderful addition to a short .308, which shoots flat enough for quick point-and-shoot use at 0-300 yards, maybe 275. That's a great match for a low-power, forward-mounted scope.
That bears no resemblance whatsoever to the optimal use of a .45-70.
Now, very poor eyesight is a good reason to get a scope. But my eyesight isn't the greatest, and I still wouldn't want to put one in a Guide Gun. Defeats the purpose of the powerful little thing.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Sorry, poorly worded. I was agreeing with you
Trying to show the OP he might have better choices but I do think a low power optic has it's place.
Essex County
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2005
- Messages
- 1,247
I put a 21/2 Leupold compact on mine. Very satisfied. Essex
bl4ckd0g
Member
My .45-70 Siamese Mauser rifle came with a 2.5x Bushnell Sharp Shooter scope and I've tried it on the gongs out to 200 yards.
That's just plain sad...
Care to accompany me to Forsyth, Montana this summer?
http://custer.visitmt.com/categories/moreinfo.asp?IDRRecordID=11203&SiteID=129
When I'm not out there, I routinely shoot steel buffalo silhouettes to 800-1000 yards at the local Lodi range, in our BPCR league. That's offhand or using shoting sticks, blackpowder loads, etc.
I also intend to take my Sharps out elk and bison hunting later on. I have plenty of bullet energy to do so, even at 400+ yards.
If you go to the Shiloh Sharps website, you'll see plenty of critters dropped long-range via their beautiful rifles.
So, no, it ain't the 1800s. That, however, doesn't stop me from using the 3" vernier sights on my own Sharps to put venison on the supper table, nor does it stop the muzzleloading folks from doing the same. It goes either way, some suffer from big-objective lens magnumitis, and then there are those of us who can take an iron-sighted Sharps, Ballard, Rolling Block, Highwall, or Trapdoor and use it just like the day they were designed. YMMV, of course.
Care to accompany me to Forsyth, Montana this summer?
http://custer.visitmt.com/categories/moreinfo.asp?IDRRecordID=11203&SiteID=129
When I'm not out there, I routinely shoot steel buffalo silhouettes to 800-1000 yards at the local Lodi range, in our BPCR league. That's offhand or using shoting sticks, blackpowder loads, etc.
I also intend to take my Sharps out elk and bison hunting later on. I have plenty of bullet energy to do so, even at 400+ yards.
If you go to the Shiloh Sharps website, you'll see plenty of critters dropped long-range via their beautiful rifles.
So, no, it ain't the 1800s. That, however, doesn't stop me from using the 3" vernier sights on my own Sharps to put venison on the supper table, nor does it stop the muzzleloading folks from doing the same. It goes either way, some suffer from big-objective lens magnumitis, and then there are those of us who can take an iron-sighted Sharps, Ballard, Rolling Block, Highwall, or Trapdoor and use it just like the day they were designed. YMMV, of course.
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
In general yes, a shotgun/muzzleloader/turkey scope is a good choice, for a variety of reasons:
-Likely it will handle the recoil
-Likely the parallax setting will roughly match the distances you'll shoot
-It will likely have a heavy reticle, which will serve you well for the purpose of a .45-70.
I'd go with one of the 1-4, 1.5-5, 1.75-6, or at most a 2-7. You don't need but a 20mm to 32mm objective for these. If you tell us the budget, I can be more specific.
-Likely it will handle the recoil
-Likely the parallax setting will roughly match the distances you'll shoot
-It will likely have a heavy reticle, which will serve you well for the purpose of a .45-70.
I'd go with one of the 1-4, 1.5-5, 1.75-6, or at most a 2-7. You don't need but a 20mm to 32mm objective for these. If you tell us the budget, I can be more specific.
Hindsight being 20/20 and all...
My post above comes across as incredibly arrogant and condescending. That was not my intention - I merely wanted folks to know that the good old .45-70 cartridge is capable of excellent accuracy, and the big heavy bullet carries a lot of energy with it way out there.
I very much understand that my Marlin 1895SS w/buckhorn sights isn't set up to properly match the trajectory of the round past 200 yards.
My Ruger #1S pictured above digests some serious .45-70 loads, including one that pushes a 405gr Beartooth bullet at a chronographed 2150fps. I wouldn't hesitate in the least to use it for hunting past 200 yards, especially with the scope.
Regardless, that doesn't mean that folks don't regularly shoot the venerable .45-70 round way out there, either for hunting or target purposes. Just because one doesn't normally see such activity doesn't mean it cannot, or does not, happen. I cordially invite others to witness such competitions or hunts, as we take advantage of 3" tall Creedmoor rear sights, etc. I myself spend a lot more time with a certain Sharps 1874 Business Rifle out to 1000 yards than I have with my previous F-Class and other long-range centerfire toys. There's something alluring about delivering a cast 535gr bullet ahead of 70gr of black powder, and having it make small groups, drop a bison, or clang a silhouette way out there.
My post above comes across as incredibly arrogant and condescending. That was not my intention - I merely wanted folks to know that the good old .45-70 cartridge is capable of excellent accuracy, and the big heavy bullet carries a lot of energy with it way out there.
I very much understand that my Marlin 1895SS w/buckhorn sights isn't set up to properly match the trajectory of the round past 200 yards.
My Ruger #1S pictured above digests some serious .45-70 loads, including one that pushes a 405gr Beartooth bullet at a chronographed 2150fps. I wouldn't hesitate in the least to use it for hunting past 200 yards, especially with the scope.
Regardless, that doesn't mean that folks don't regularly shoot the venerable .45-70 round way out there, either for hunting or target purposes. Just because one doesn't normally see such activity doesn't mean it cannot, or does not, happen. I cordially invite others to witness such competitions or hunts, as we take advantage of 3" tall Creedmoor rear sights, etc. I myself spend a lot more time with a certain Sharps 1874 Business Rifle out to 1000 yards than I have with my previous F-Class and other long-range centerfire toys. There's something alluring about delivering a cast 535gr bullet ahead of 70gr of black powder, and having it make small groups, drop a bison, or clang a silhouette way out there.
- Status
