Is .45 Colt +P from a carbine a modern day .45-70?

[Prepster]

Hello THR, I recently ordered a Marlin 1894 Cowboy in .45 Colt after falling in love with one at the range. I know that it serves short range plinking purposes quite well, and it’ll make a mean home defense weapon when I get it (hopefully at the end of this week) It’s capable of using +P loads, which seem like they can be quite strong, almost up to .45-70 standards (in standard pressure, anyway). I’m wondering if there’s any meaningful difference between these two cartridges when both are fired out of a rifle.

Double Tap lists their 335 grain .45 Colt +P at a velocity of 1655 fps from a 16.5’’ Carbine. According to the handloads.com ballistic calculator, this yields a muzzle energy of 2037 ft./lbs.

Now, of course one can find .45-70 cartridges that achieve African Safari levels of power, but for this comparison I’d like to use more of a standard .45-70.

Winchester Super X cartridges are considered to be great hunting rounds and are fairly proven as I understand it (I’m not really a hunter, so if I’m wrong please correct me). They list their 300 gr. JHP .45-70 at a velocity of 1880 fps (unknown barrel length) for a muzzle energy of 2355 ft./lbs. Out of a shorter carbine, I’d imagine this would be a little less.

Given these two examples as well as others that you may be familiar with, would you feel comfortable saying that .45 Colt +P from a carbine is an acceptable substitute for a mid-level .45-70 for general use? General use: plinking at 100 yards or less, hiking in dangerous game country, etc. Hunting experience is quite welcome too; I just don’t partake in it.

Note: this is more for curiosity than anything else, as the I know the 1894 will already do everything that I need it to.

Thanks!

 

[SaxonPig]

If I recall the original 45/70 load used a 405 bullet at around 1400 FPS. More modern loads/calibers will generally use somewhat lighter bullets at higher velocities.

I guess a fully loaded 45 Colt from a carbine could rival the energy of the old 45/70 load, but the heavier bullet will always hit harder and penetrate deeper.

 

[Robert]

A fully loaded, up to it's true potential not +p, 45-70 can not be touched by a .45 colt round. There is a reason that 45-70 was used to hunt American Bison and not .45 Colt. And comparing +p .45 Colt to a standard 45-70 is not much of a comparison. Of course the .45 Colt looks hotter, it is. I shoot Black Hills 405 gr out of my Marlin 1895G and have good hits out to 100 yards, have not shot it much farther for score. I see what you are getting at but I think the only way to really tell would be to do some work with both. And this is not even going into the fact that both were designed as black powder loads. And as far as home defense goes I would get a 12ga, but that's just me.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Some of those long 45 Colt rounds MAY NOT load in your rifle, keep that in mind before you buy a bunch of them. (Had this problem with a hot 44 Magnum load that will work in a Super Black Hawk, my Marlin won't cycle them.)

Sure a hot 45 Colt might be similar to a light 45/70 at short range but, generally the 45/70 not only has better ballistic coefficient (more pointed bullet thats more aerodynamic) the jackets are also usally quite thicker than on a handgun round. Meaning a 45-70 should blow right through an elk at close range, where your 45 Colt loaded hot might shed its jeacket (provided we aren't talking a hard cast load) before penetrating and seriously underperform. Your pistol rounds will also drop like a rock at 100 yards compared to a 45-70.

If you are just plinking? Doesn't matter. For hunting anything bigger than white tail I'd want more gun.

 

[Prepster]

Thanks for the replies guys.

I don't plan on hunting Buffalo any time soon, so this isn't really a big issue, just wondering like I said above.

Dr. Rob, I didn't think about the jacket thickness, that's an interesting point. I did figure there might be more drop involved w/ 45 colt.

 

[Kilgor]

Re: Jacket Thickness

Think hardcast.

 

[Prepster]

^Definately. There are some mean hardcast loads out there that wouldn't have that problem.

 

[35Rem]

There is a reason that 45-70 was used to hunt American Bison and not .45 Colt.

Yep, powder choices, or more specifically NO Choices. All blackpowder at that time.
Yes, the carbines today can even exceed the rifles of old. Puma makes the Winchester model 1892 in 454 Casull. That's a 45 Colt on steroids. And you can shoot the 45 colt in it.
You marlin in 45 with a good load will make a handy little carbine for deer sized game at a reasonable distance.
Have fun.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Yeah, I suppose it's equivalent (roughly) to the old time .45-70, but of course can't match modern level 2 .45-70.

 

[SaxonPig]

Probably the main reason no 45 Colt carbines were used to hunt bison (or anything else for that matter) in the 19th century is that none were made. The 45 Colt uses a very narrow rim which vexed rifle makers who were unable to make it extract reliably from a rifle until modern times when better quality material was used in the cases making that narrow rim strong enough to be extracted from a lever rifle.

I suspect a 300 grain bullet could be driven from a 45 Colt rifle at around 1500-1600 FPS. Still much less powerful that the heavier slug from the 45/70 but not exactly the pipsqueak some would suggest.

 

[ArmedBear]

Y'all don't get why the .45-70 was used to hunt bison. It wasn't velocity. It's bullet weight. Velocity is WAY overrated.

Velocity and energy are modern obsessions, but once you see what a slow-moving RNL 525 grain bullet does when it contacts bison, your perspective will be forever altered.

Energy is a way to make a tiny bullet do a big bullet's job (some of the time) and give a flatter trajectory. But a tiny bullet isn't a big bullet, and nothing that fits in .45LC comes close to a real .45-70 load, even with black powder.

Momentum trumps energy, because energy overstates the importance of velocity.