I think you know more than you are letting on
When used in say, 22" barrel lever action carbines and loaded with 300 grain bullets and middle of the chart load data the figures are very similar.
The 45-70 will do it with less pressure but the Casull will do it more efficiently.
Did you know the .500 S&W is a ballistic duplicate of the, depending on the bullet weight used, .50-70 Govt or the .50-90 and .50-110 Express Winchester rifle cartridges?
Same game with the Casull, same power level but less ranging capability as an early rifle cartridge in in handgun size platform.
Brilliant concept actually.
The .45-70 will make the .454 Casull look like an experimant gone bad when you look at true long range rifle ballistics using heavy spire point bullets and controlled powder charges.
Of course these are single shot or magazine fed bolt action loads, not true lever rifle loads.
In other words, a fast handling, controllable, lever action, heavy timber rifle would be about the same ballistically in either caliber.
The nod still goes to the .45-70 if longer ranging, more powerful loads are desired.
Why would anybody chamber the .454 Casull in a single shot rifle when we still have the excellent .45-70?
I'm not going to sell my 1886 lightweight or my single shot .45-70s and buy a .454 Casull rifle but that's me.
Does this answer your question?
