Anyone had good accuracy with a 405g cast lead bullet, at long ranges?

[JimGnitecki]

1. Have any of you had good accuracy results using a 405g cast lead bullet at long ranges. More specifically:

- 0.5 to 0.75 MOA level accuracy

- Up to 600 yards ranges

- Using SMOKELESS powder

- Target shooting only (not hunting), so no expansion needed

- Using a 405g flat base, NOT hollow base, bullet (i.e. NOT the Lee 405g HB that was designed for Trapdoor shooting and apparently cannot handle more than about 1250 fps)

- Ideally, a high velocity load (since shooting st up to 600 yards and BC of a 405g cast bullet is not very high)

2. How good a Ballistic Coefficient can you get using the right casting mold? (ok, at least BC not under .225)

3. Is there a 405g bullet mold that produces an ogive that is round Head or pointed, versus flat point? (To get a BC that is better than a 450g FP would provide)

I'm asking because shooting 464g to 500g bullets out of my Pedersoli Sharps replica, with meticulous load development, cartridge preparation, and ladder testing cannot seem to get me any better than about 0.8 MOA even at just 150 meters = 164 yards, let alone 600 yards. I'm completely stalled at that accuracy limit. So, I'm ready to try a different bullet weight and velocity.

Jim G

 

[EricBu]

Sorry, just choked on my coffee. Brother, if you're shooting 45-70 at traditional Trapdoor/Sharps velocities into a .8 inch group at 100 yards, you've basically achieved perfection in my book. To stretch to 600 yards...time to focus on your sights, dope, and reading wind, because your ammo is there.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Sorry, just choked on my coffee. Brother, if you're shooting 45-70 at traditional Trapdoor/Sharps velocities into a .8 inch group at 100 yards, you've basically achieved perfection in my book. To stretch to 600 yards...time to focus on your sights, dope, and reading wind, because your ammo is there.

0.8 MOA at 600 yards = 5" group. And that is achieved only if I have a perfect hold and sight picture, each and every time, and if I could read the wind accurately enough to compensate perfectly for the slow velocity and rianbow trajectory. So, that 5" group could (would!) become notably larger in real life.

Is that really as good as I can get a good quality .45-70 Sharps replica to shoot, even with carefully handloaded ammo, using a 6 power semi-authentic "Malcolm-type full-length telescopic sight? That seems anti-climatic for a buffalo rifle replica manufactured and nourished with all the benefits of modern technology.

Jim G

 

[Show Me]

I

Sorry, just choked on my coffee. Brother, if you're shooting 45-70 at traditional Trapdoor/Sharps velocities into a .8 inch group at 100 yards, you've basically achieved perfection in my book. To stretch to 600 yards...time to focus on your sights, dope, and reading wind, because your ammo is there

Who else are you going to smart off to today

 

[EricBu]

0.8 MOA at 600 yards = 5" group. And that is achieved only if I have a perfect hold and sight picture, each and every time, and if I could read the wind accurately enough to compensate perfectly for the slow velocity and rianbow trajectory. So, that 5" group could (would!) become notably larger in real life.

Is that really as good as I can get a good quality .45-70 Sharps replica to shoot, even with carefully handloaded ammo, using a 6 power semi-authentic "Malcolm-type full-length telescopic sight? That seems anti-climatic for a buffalo rifle replica manufactured and nourished with all the benefits of modern technology.

Jim G

5 inch 600 yard group with a buffalo rifle, even with the optics is in the realm of amazing. Personally, I can barely manage that with a Barrett, 24x ERT, and meticulously loaded .338 LM. I don't know whether to tell you to manage your expectations, or sponsor you for long range silhouette shooting, lol.

 

[Barmcd]

I don't think you will come anywhere close to that with that gun and bullet. I can shoot under 3/4 MOA at 500 yards and 1 MOA out to 800 yards with a 140 grain Nosler RDF in my 6.5 CM. Using 42 grains of H4350 that gives me a muzzle velocity of 2750 fps. That's a medium weight bullet that stays supersonic over 1100 yards. Your bullet is slowing down like its got a drag chute.

 

[AJC1]

I believe having sub moa expectations is every bit of modern technology supporting a case and bullet that is late 1800s technology. Should you shift to a more modern bullet you might eak out another tenth, but your at competition levels. I haven't seen reports of you getting sub moa at 5 or 6 hundred but maybe I missed it. I don't really expect a 45-70 to be any more accurate than a 22lr because the ballistics arent really better.... the bullets aren't really any better either.

 

[Outpost75]

0.8 MOA at 600 yards = 5" group. And that is achieved only if I have a perfect hold and sight picture, each and every time, and if I could read the wind accurately enough to compensate perfectly for the slow velocity and rianbow trajectory. So, that 5" group could (would!) become notably larger in real life.

Is that really as good as I can get a good quality .45-70 Sharps replica to shoot, even with carefully handloaded ammo, using a 6 power semi-authentic "Malcolm-type full-length telescopic sight? That seems anti-climatic for a buffalo rifle replica manufactured and nourished with all the benefits of modern technology.

Jim G

You are looking at the occasional great group experienced as a random variation of chance and not the long run average. Find a copy of Frank Grubb' s book. Statistical Measures of Accuracy for Riflemen and Missile Engineers. Acquaint yourself with the parameters for a circular-normal distribution.

 

[Dynamite Rabbit]

100 meters = 164 yards

Not sure if this changes your calculus at all, but FWIW 100 meters is 109 yards, not 164.

 

[Rodfac]

100 meters = 164 yards,

100 meters = 109.36 yards.....You may not meet your expectations for long range results with lead alloy bullets....Rod

 

[JimGnitecki]

Not sure if this changes your calculus at all, but FWIW 100 meters is 109 yards, not 164.

Yeah, I mistyped. I have been actually shooting at a measured 150 meters = 164 yards, and a 1.5" 5-shot group at 164 yards is about 0.8 MOA. But, if its 0.8 MOA at 164 yards, its going to be worse at 600, because that slow bullet gets moved a LOT in any wind, because it takes multiple SECONDS to get there. So, I would need to do a LOT better than 0.8 MOA at 164 yards to keep the bullet on a target at 600.

Sigh . . .

Jim G

 

[Charlie98]

Yeah, I mistyped. I have been actually shooting at a measured 150 meters = 164 yards, and a 1.5" 5-shot group at 164 yards is about 0.8 MOA. But, if its 0.8 MOA at 164 yards, its going to be worse at 600, because that slow bullet gets moved a LOT in any wind, because it takes multiple SECONDS to get there. So, I would need to do a LOT better than 0.8 MOA at 164 yards to keep the bullet on a target at 600.

Sigh . . .

Jim G

When we were shooting steel up in WY a few years ago, I was spotting for some of the guys, shooting .45-xx's and other bores. I don't know what weight bullet they were tossing, but it was at least a 405grn. Because of the conditions, I was able to clearly see the path of the bullet. Now, these guys are good shots, no doubt... and they have spent considerable time working up these loads, because some of them compete... but you could still see the bullet move off path, it was like a hand swatted it. If you've ever watched a baseball pitch that drops right at the plate (and I'm not up on baseball nomenclature, so I don't know what to call that kind of pitch...) that's what the bullet looks like. No, the shooter didn't influence the bullet's path, but something did... and unless you are shooting in a controlled environment... there is only so much you can do.

If it really was all just load workup and rifle setup, you would see a bunch of clean scores at the Quigley... but that is not what that kind of shooting is about.

 

[johnjohn]

Good accuracy with my 45/70's is like good gas mileage. I have never gotten it.

 

[Jim Watson]

I haven't been able to find anybody else shooting coated .45-70 bullets with smokeless powder.
MOA with black powder and grease groove bullets is a challenge, I was always happy to hit a silhouette about 2 minutes the narrow way. I was shooting a 404 grain bullet, but it was a .40, not a .45. Even the Army went to a 500 grain bullet in the late Trapdoor era.

The old timers typically shot benchrest and schuetzen at 200 yards or 40 rods, 220 yards.
C.W. Rowland got down to .725" at 200 yards in 1901 with a .32-40 Pope barrel on a Ballard action. That record stood for 50 years until somebody got good with jacketed bullets in a bolt action. It was not beaten with plain based cast bullets until 1978. He was not forthcoming about his loads, may have been smokeless, may have been duplex. Bullets certainly muzzle loaded, but what diameter, weight, and lube?

 

[Charlie98]

Good accuracy with my 45/70's is like good gas mileage. I have never gotten it.

I think part of the problem is a misplaced anticipation of accuracy. The .45-70 is not a benchrest round... it is a big, fat, unaerodynamic hunk of lead catapulted through the air. Like everything, it's possible to throw money at it, and come up with a once-in-a-lifetime result, but, as I said prior, that's not what shooting these kinds of rifles and cartridges is about.

I mentioned shooting in WY. Our furthest target was 1244yds, and was 3 or 4 pieces of pipe hung together to make one target, probably about 5' square. I thought I'd died and gone to Heaven the first time I dinged those! ...I'm using a 100+ year old technology rifle and sights, shooting off 2 1x2" sticks, setting in the grass in windy Wyoming, with cartridges I mashed together myself. I mean... come on!

See the back dot... left high of center? No, that's not the 1244yd target, that's only the 900yd target...

I didn't wear my arm out patting myself on the back, but it gave me a taste of what an accomplishment it was... and is. Sure, I wanted more, more better, more more betterer... and I've gotten it... but to think I'm going to shoot 1MOA at that distance, with that rifle and cartridge, is foolhardy.

 

[EricBu]

I mean, it's not like there isn't a LONG tradition of long distance shooting for these rifles, with competitions going back over a hundred years and even longer...but nobody shot groups, lol, nor did anybody much care. Hell, Poncho Villa used to hold competitions with prisoners as long range targets. I shoot with a guy who was a huge BP cartridge competition shooter, with several 45-XX Shiloh Sharps rifles. He put a LOT of effort into those bullets, you talk about meticulous....watching a guy handload BP in those cases is a real lesson...not like us modern smokeless guys, lol...you don't just weight the powder and dump it in;-) We used to be able to shoot at a local gravel pit, and had a 36 inch man hole cover hung on the far side, painted white, with a 6 inch black circle in the middle. It was just a hair over 1000 yards. Watching him work those sights, and scoring a first round hit was always amazing to me. On cold mornings, you could easily see the bullet's vapor trail, and it took a measurable amount of time to get down range...and that sucker looked crazy going down range! Was very strange watching him take the rifle off the rest, and ear pro out...before the bullet hit the target. But he'd shoot that steel twice, then it was 20 minutes of cleaning that rifle, lol. He very rarely bothered with 100 yard targets, and the few times I saw him shoot for a group, I don't think I ever saw him shoot a group under an inch with those guns, and I think combined his whole collection of sharps cost more than my first house, and he never seemed to much care how small his BP cartridge groups were.

 

[JimGnitecki]

I haven't been able to find anybody else shooting coated .45-70 bullets with smokeless powder.
MOA with black powder and grease groove bullets is a challenge, I was always happy to hit a silhouette about 2 minutes the narrow way. I was shooting a 404 grain bullet, but it was a .40, not a .45. Even the Army went to a 500 grain bullet in the late Trapdoor era.

The old timers typically shot benchrest and schuetzen at 200 yards or 40 rods, 220 yards.
C.W. Rowland got down to .725" at 200 yards in 1901 with a .32-40 Pope barrel on a Ballard action. That record stood for 50 years until somebody got good with jacketed bullets in a bolt action. It was not beaten with plain based cast bullets until 1978. He was not forthcoming about his loads, may have been smokeless, may have been duplex. Bullets certainly muzzle loaded, but what diameter, weight, and lube?

Yes, I find it very confusing. With my current, most successful "500g" bullet, which casts at difffering weights depending on alloy composition of course, I have tried 3 different weight/alloy combinations: 499g, 474g, and 464g, with no discernibly visible differences in accuracy.

I know that the QUALITY of my handloads must be decent, because on any 5-shot group that I examine the Labradar records for, the SD is under 5 fps and the ES is maybe 10 fps. The EXTREME variance on my cast bullet weights is 1.0 grain or less, and the SD is about 0.2g.

I have tried different bullet hardnesses in the BHN 10 to BHN 16.6 range, with no detectable differences in accuracy.

The Pedersoli rifle's bore diameter is .4563" per my local gunsmith. The rifle has exhibited only a very minor preference for .459" bullet diameter versus .460". To try .458", I will need to tighten up my expander die, losing the carefully configured perfect case expansion that has worked so well at .460" and .459". (When I tried to seat .458" bullets, they ended up too loose to be reliably stable). But, I'll probably try that as my last gasp effort on 500g weighty range bullets. But that's it. if that does not improve the accuracy, I'm done with fooling around with 500g weight range bullets.

I suppose I could try using a conventional lubricant versus the powdercoating, but I'd have to spend more on shipping Alox to me than the Alox itself costs, and I really don't want to use a messy sticky substance whose coverage is hit or miss because you cannopt really SEE its coverage reliably, and l have zero interest in using sizing-die-applied lubricants. I've got my powder coating to the point where it adds only 1.2 grains of powder to each bullet and gives me a LOT of assurance of no barrel leading (I have never experienced barrel leading with this rifle using the powder coating).

I am just ready to try a different bullet weight range, that wil also give me a different, higher velocity range as a new variable to play with, with 405g and 450g bullets being obvious possibilities.

But again buying one, or more likely, several, costly molds to try different bullets in a new weight range is not an attractive prospect. The only inexpensive molds are the Lee molds, which also have the advanatge of no rusting, but Lee makes only 2 405g molds, and one is usless to me because it is hollow base, so just 1 choice in Lee at 405g.

I suppose I could try to be satisfied with a 500g weight rnage bullet accuracy of 0.8 MOA accuracy at 164 yards, but what might that accuracy look like at 655 yards (600 meters)? It could be far worse at 655 yards. And when almost any rifle nowadays can shoot 1 MOA, 0.8 MOA sounds pretty pathetic afetr the effort and costs I have expended.

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

I mean, it's not like there isn't a LONG tradition of long distance shooting for these rifles, with competitions going back over a hundred years and even longer...but nobody shot groups, lol, nor did anybody much care. Hell, Poncho Villa used to hold competitions with prisoners as long range targets. I shoot with a guy who was a huge BP cartridge competition shooter, with several 45-XX Shiloh Sharps rifles. He put a LOT of effort into those bullets, you talk about meticulous....watching a guy handload BP in those cases is a real lesson...not like us modern smokeless guys, lol...you don't just weight the powder and dump it in;-) We used to be able to shoot at a local gravel pit, and had a 36 inch man hole cover hung on the far side, painted white, with a 6 inch black circle in the middle. It was just a hair over 1000 yards. Watching him work those sights, and scoring a first round hit was always amazing to me. On cold mornings, you could easily see the bullet's vapor trail, and it took a measurable amount of time to get down range...and that sucker looked crazy going down range! Was very strange watching him take the rifle off the rest, and ear pro out...before the bullet hit the target. But he'd shoot that steel twice, then it was 20 minutes of cleaning that rifle, lol. He very rarely bothered with 100 yard targets, and the few times I saw him shoot for a group, I don't think I ever saw him shoot a group under an inch with those guns, and I think combined his whole collection of sharps cost more than my first house, and he never seemed to much care how small his BP cartridge groups were.

You could be right.

Another reason to just shoot (thick and hard!) metal gongs with these rifles is that my on-order electronic target system, that I bought for my OTHER shooting, only works with bullets that are supersonic when they pass through the target frame. And walking 600 yards and back each time I want to check my results would get both tedious and tiring really quick, and the only other solution is a $1000 CAN = $750 US target camera system that transmits the target image back to the firing line.

So, yes, maybe the sane thing to do here is to hang as large and heavy a metal target as I can load an unload from my truck at the 600 meter mark, and just be satisfied with fulfilling "dings" for a reasonable percentage of the shots fired. I do recall that when about 25 years ago I fired at a fullsize metal buffalo profile set out at 500 yards in Wyoming a few times with a Pedersoli Rolling Block and a tall tang mounted ladder peep sight, and finally hit it with a 405g bullet, it WAS very satisfying.

Something to think about.

Jim G

 

[ballman6711]

The .45-70: Still Going Strong | Sports Afield

New bullet designs and construction have given new life and new versatility to the venerable .45-70 Government. While big bore lever-actions have long.

sportsafield.com

I thought this was an interesting read, you may as well.

chris

 

[EricBu]

Yes, I find it very confusing. With my current, most successful "500g" bullet, which casts at difffering weights depending on alloy composition of course, I have tried 3 different weight/alloy combinations: 499g, 474g, and 464g, with no discernibly visible differences in accuracy.

I know that the QUALITY of my handloads must be decent, because on any 5-shot group that I examine the Labradar records for, the SD is under 5 fps and the ES is maybe 10 fps. The EXTREME variance on my cast bullet weights is 1.0 grain or less, and the SD is about 0.2g.

I have tried different bullet hardnesses in the BHN 10 to BHN 16.6 range, with no detectable differences in accuracy.

The Pedersoli rifle's bore diameter is .4563" per my local gunsmith. The rifle has exhibited only a very minor preference for .459" bullet diameter versus .460". To try .458", I will need to tighten up my expander die, losing the carefully configured perfect case expansion that has worked so well at .460" and .459". (When I tried to seat .458" bullets, they ended up too loose to be reliably stable). But, I'll probably try that as my last gasp effort on 500g weighty range bullets. But that's it. if that does not improve the accuracy, I'm done with fooling around with 500g weight range bullets.

I suppose I could try using a conventional lubricant versus the powdercoating, but I'd have to spend more on shipping Alox to me than the Alox itself costs, and I really don't want to use a messy sticky substance whose coverage is hit or miss because you cannopt really SEE its coverage reliably, and l have zero interest in using sizing-die-applied lubricants. I've got my powder coating to the point where it adds only 1.2 grains of powder to each bullet and gives me a LOT of assurance of no barrel leading (I have never experienced barrel leading with this rifle using the powder coating).

I am just ready to try a different bullet weight range, that wil also give me a different, higher velocity range as a new variable to play with, with 405g and 450g bullets being obvious possibilities.

But again buying one, or more likely, several, costly molds to try different bullets in a new weight range is not an attractive prospect. The only inexpensive molds are the Lee molds, which also have the advanatge of no rusting, but Lee makes only 2 405g molds, and one is usless to me because it is hollow base, so just 1 choice in Lee at 405g.

I suppose I could try to be satisfied with a 500g weight rnage bullet accuracy of 0.8 MOA accuracy at 164 yards, but what might that accuracy look like at 655 yards (600 meters)? It could be far worse at 655 yards. And when almost any rifle nowadays can shoot 1 MOA, 0.8 MOA sounds pretty pathetic afetr the effort and costs I have expended.

Jim G

Many here may slam me for this.....but I do not think you want to go back to a lubed bullet. You will be basically starting from scratch on your load work up (if you think that the BHN variation from 10 to 16.6 won't make as much of an impact on accuracy with traditional lube over the coating, you're in for a shock) ....and not to mention the extra effort on cleaning the lead up. As far as the "real world" is concerned, you are really there with your load...I personally do not think you have anywhere to go with this, and should stick with where you're at. Just me...but you have developed what I would emphatically say is the single most accurate 45-70 load in a Sharps that I have ever personally heard of. I think now, it's time to move to 500 yard steel, and then start pushing that out further as you get dialed in at the long distances. I cheat, and tie ribbons on trees at the target, and at 2 or 3 points between me and the target...so I can see what the wind is doing. If you want to be close to the NRA silhouette shooting, get the specs for the 500 yard ram target. It also sounds like you shoot out in the country, not so much at a range (which is what I do), so it maybe be worth a look at a t-post hanger for your targets. We have t-posts pre-ranged in our local shooting spots, and just hang the targets on them. We used to suffer the pain of hanging them, but the t-post hangers are so much better and easier to deal with.

We do have some that we actually just leave out there, and just repaint them when we shoot. One of those is at 1 mile, and I've never hit it myself, lol. I've scared it once or twice though. I don't have enough elevation on my scope;-(

 

[jmorris]

0.8 MOA at 600 yards = 5" group. And that is achieved only if I have a perfect hold and sight picture, each and every time, and if I could read the wind accurately enough to compensate perfectly for the slow velocity and rianbow trajectory. So, that 5" group could (would!) become notably larger in real life.

Is that really as good as I can get a good quality .45-70 Sharps replica to shoot, even with carefully handloaded ammo, using a 6 power semi-authentic "Malcolm-type full-length telescopic sight? That seems anti-climatic for a buffalo rifle replica manufactured and nourished with all the benefits of modern technology.

That’s all hypothetical, might just try it and see how you actually do. I highly doubt that as good as anyone could get. Form a club and start competitions, someone will do better at some point.

I you want something climatic, watch a movie. Exceptional groups are, well unusually good or outstanding from all others. You get those by shooting lots of groups and picking out that great one to talk about.

If your aggregate is .8‘ at 100 with cast bullets, I’d say your on track for a real winner at some point.

 

[AJC1]

Based on your bullet observations the lower bhn bullet is cheaper to make and just as good. This is when powdercoated which essentially is a soft jacket. If one goes to traditional lube then base erosion becomes a factor and then testing with gas checks. I consider that an expensive digression. Moving forward if a better bullet is in the cards you may want to design your own bullet with a very small meplat, for your purposes. Most 45-70 bullets are designed for lever guns and those that aren't seem crazy heavy. I would play with a ballistic calculator and find a weight and minimum bc that meets your goals based on intentional launch velosity. The only set parameter I would begin with is 2200fps maximum because lead bullets over that get complicated in their own right.

 

[Chief TC]

I shoot an 1874 Sharps Pedersoli and compete with it. Heavier bullets always perform better at longer ranges. 405s, I have found to be good at to about 400yds. I use 520gr bullets with 4 grease groove using BP and I am usually about 2-3 MOA at 500-600yds with vernier sights. If you are .8 MOA with optics at short distances, you and your rifle are performing as well as can be expected. Buffalo guns, even if newly manufactured, are not designed to perform at the same level as PRS rifles. If you develop a load that is 2MOA or less at 400ish, then you have your load. Then anything beyind that is you learning how to adjust your sights for that distance based on conditions. And you are shooting smokeless, so you don't have the extra challenge of fouling control.

 

[Charlie98]

I don't have enough elevation on my scope;-(

Here is the peep sight on my Browning 71 .348WCF. I had it jacked out as far as it would go for the 600yd target... and I went ahead and took a poke at the 900. I put the front sight bead on TOP of the peep disk... and let fly a few times. I was in the neighborhood, but I'll admit, a hit would have been pure luck. I loaded those 200grn FN bullets for 2200fps, they were certainly running out of steam by the time they got out to 900yds. It's fun to push the boundaries... I shot my Savage 99 .308 at the 900yd target, too... but those 173's ran out of steam shortly after 600yds.

 

[EricBu]

Here is the peep sight on my Browning 71 .348WCF. I had it jacked out as far as it would go for the 600yd target... and I went ahead and took a poke at the 900. I put the front sight bead on TOP of the peep disk... and let fly a few times. I was in the neighborhood, but I'll admit, a hit would have been pure luck. I loaded those 200grn FN bullets for 2200fps, they were certainly running out of steam by the time they got out to 900yds. It's fun to push the boundaries... I shot my Savage 99 .308 at the 900yd target, too... but those 173's ran out of steam shortly after 600yds.

Yeah, I can't touch anything out past 500 with irons or peeps. Eyes are too old now;-( But I still do a bit of long range stuff with the .308, .338 LM, and even some stuff with the AR, though I can't get to 900 with that. The only thing I can consistently hit 1000 yards with is the .338. I'm good to 700 or so with the .308, but they run out of steam fast.