Picked up another Ruger No. 1… (45-70)

[westernrover]

I want a 1H with a D-weight barrel, most of all in 450-400, but either of the 458's, the 416s, 404, or the 450 would all be terrific. I'd pass on the 460 or 505 unless I determined to handload them to less recoil. I think they did produce the 45-70, but they're extraordinarily rare, and that is not what appeals to me about it. I have more practical things to prioritize, but I'll be pleased to own one someday. I'd even hunt mule deer with it.

 

[marksman13]

you can make a 45/70 is about 1 minute or less with a Lee Classic Loaded and a hammer. $45 for the loader ! make ammo in the feild and shoot it

I could, but I’m just not gonna do it. Enthusiasm is probably where I’m lacking the most.

 

[Mark_Mark]

I could, but I’m just not gonna do it. Enthusiasm is probably where I’m lacking the most.

I hear ya! but tell you what, it’s relaxing. watch this short video of my favor mountain man who lives off the grid. And how relaxing this is, out in nature!

45-70 reload

Reloading for my Marlin 45-70, useing the Lee kit, Speer 400 GR Flat Nose bullets, and Du Pont IMR 4227 powder.

youtu.be

 

[marksman13]

I hear ya! but tell you what, it’s relaxing. watch this short video of my favor mountain man who lives off the grid. And how relaxing this is, out in nature!

45-70 reload

Reloading for my Marlin 45-70, useing the Lee kit, Speer 400 GR Flat Nose bullets, and Du Pont IMR 4227 powder.

youtu.be

I gave it a whirl once. I don’t have the patience or the desire. Just not my thing. If I shot more often, I might make time for it, but probably not.

 

[adcoch1]

I desperately want a no.1, and because of this thread I went looking at gunbroker. There are lots of very nice ones available, I even found all of the specific models I wanted. And most were at least reasonably priced for a fancy rifle. I may have to get serious about deciding which one I want the most...

 

[marksman13]

I desperately want a no.1, and because of this thread I went looking at gunbroker. There are lots of very nice ones available, I even found all of the specific models I wanted. And most were at least reasonably priced for a fancy rifle. I may have to get serious about deciding which one I want the most...

It’s all about tempering your expectations with No. 1s. Just understand that they are beautiful, fickle beasts and you may get a shooter, you may get one that’s “accurate enough” and you may get an absolute dog. If you do get a dog, they are a pain in the butt to get right. But, the reward is that none of your buddies are gonna show up at deer camp toting one and they are great handling rifles to hunt with. I love them, but I don’t think I’d own one as my only hunting rifle, or as a long(ish) range hunting rifle.

 

[adcoch1]

It’s all about tempering your expectations with No. 1s. Just understand that they are beautiful, fickle beasts and you may get a shooter, you may get one that’s “accurate enough” and you may get an absolute dog. If you do get a dog, they are a pain in the butt to get right. But, the reward is that none of your buddies are gonna show up at deer camp toting one and they are great handling rifles to hunt with. I love them, but I don’t think I’d own one as my only hunting rifle, or as a long(ish) range hunting rifle.

I have a pretty realistic opinion of what they should be(I think), about 2 moa for any full sized rifle caliber would do anything I'd ask of it. I want a stalking rifle, and that means a lot of unsupported shots, probably less than 200 yards. So a 30-06 or 7x57 that'll throw the first three in a 6" circle at 200 would be great. Then I need to get practiced enough to do it every time like I used to.

 

[marksman13]

I have a pretty realistic opinion of what they should be(I think), about 2 moa for any full sized rifle caliber would do anything I'd ask of it. I want a stalking rifle, and that means a lot of unsupported shots, probably less than 200 yards. So a 30-06 or 7x57 that'll throw the first three in a 6" circle at 200 would be great. Then I need to get practiced enough to do it every time like I used to.

Yeah. With those expectations you’ll be plenty happy with a No. 1.

 

[Boom Vang]

The Hornady Interlock obviously shed its jacket somewhere in the deer. I don’t have a scale, but weight retention does not appear to be great.

To paraphrase an old wisecrack,"At what point in the deer's fatality did the bullet fail?"

The idea of "retained weight" being some sort of weighty (ha ha) metric of projectile performance was not a thing, according to one source, until mentioned by the late great Bob Hagel in his Game Loads and Practical Ballistics for the American Hunter (1978). A good book by the way. Hagel was probably making some correlation to penetration performance, but retained weight in and of itself is a meaningless statistic. If the bullet penetrated sufficiently and destroyed tissue, I wouldn't care of it was left with 0 weight when it was done.

That bullet seems fine for smaller whitetail deer. Having said that, I'm not a fan of 300 grain bullets or Hornady FTX in .45-70 for anything else. I've used their 350 grain FP in the past and had good results up to medium sized wild boars. I've sort of gone full circle and now use 400-425 grain LBT bullets, and accept that the 45-70 is a 100-150 yard rifles under modern conditions.

 

[marksman13]

To paraphrase an old wisecrack,"At what point in the deer's fatality did the bullet fail?"

The idea of "retained weight" being some sort of weighty (ha ha) metric of projectile performance was not a thing, according to one source, until mentioned by the late great Bob Hagel in his Game Loads and Practical Ballistics for the American Hunter (1978). A good book by the way. Hagel was probably making some correlation to penetration performance, but retained weight in and of itself is a meaningless statistic. If the bullet penetrated sufficiently and destroyed tissue, I wouldn't care of it was left with 0 weight when it was done.

That bullet seems fine for smaller whitetail deer. Having said that, I'm not a fan of 300 grain bullets or Hornady FTX in .45-70 for anything else. I've used their 350 grain FP in the past and had good results up to medium sized wild boars. I've sort of gone full circle and now use 400-425 grain LBT bullets, and accept that the 45-70 is a 100-150 yard rifles under modern conditions.

Eh…if you read the rest of my post, I never mentioned that the bullet failed. Quite the contrary. It just came apart which I didn’t really expect.

 

[sage5907]

Although I've never owned a No. 1 I have always been a fan and your rifle in 45-70 with the 2-7 Leupold looks like the perfect combination, and I especially like the short barrel. I am also a fan of large caliber bullets because when you hit a game animal they don't get very far. The closest comparison that I have is my White Super 91 50 caliber muzzleloader that uses a 430 grain super slug. Years ago there was a heated argument between Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith about small and large caliber bullets and in the beginning I went with ole Jack who loved his 270 but after many years of hunting I realized Elmer was right. Large diameter bullets are more predictable and seem to kill better. Elmer was one of the first to use the 338-06 and I own two of them now. Every time I see a No. 1 at a gun show I pick it up and shake my head.

 

[Caplock]

I have never bought factory ammo for my 458. Couldn't get brass for probably a year or more. Wasn't in stock anywhere. Had to blow out some of my 300 win mag brass just so I could have brass to load.

 

[marksman13]

Although I've never owned a No. 1 I have always been a fan and your rifle in 45-70 with the 2-7 Leupold looks like the perfect combination, and I especially like the short barrel. I am also a fan of large caliber bullets because when you hit a game animal they don't get very far. The closest comparison that I have is my White Super 91 50 caliber muzzleloader that uses a 430 grain super slug. Years ago there was a heated argument between Jack O'Connor and Elmer Keith about small and large caliber bullets and in the beginning I went with ole Jack who loved his 270 but after many years of hunting I realized Elmer was right. Large diameter bullets are more predictable and seem to kill better. Elmer was one of the first to use the 338-06 and I own two of them now. Every time I see a No. 1 at a gun show I pick it up and shake my head.

I like em all, but my experience has been that big and slow kills predictably, but very rarely produces a bang! Flop! Generally I shoot deer with big, slow bullets and they run 50-100 yards before they bleed out and go down. Massive blood loss, but no hydrostatic shock.

Fast moving, smaller projectiles tend to have a light-switch effect. Bang! Flop! Done. If the deer does not drop in place, however, tracking can be a more difficult task.

 

[sage5907]

I like em all, but my experience has been that big and slow kills predictably, but very rarely produces a bang! Flop! Generally I shoot deer with big, slow bullets and they run 50-100 yards before they bleed out and go down. Massive blood loss, but no hydrostatic shock.

Fast moving, smaller projectiles tend to have a light-switch effect. Bang! Flop! Done. If the deer does not drop in place, however, tracking can be a more difficult task.

100% True, When I hunt with a 280. 30-06 or 338 I expect the hydrostatic shock to be devistating and with either Nosler AccuBond or Partition bullets the whole front quarter is saturated with blood and basically not usable. About the only meat that is usable are the back strap and hind quarters. Big slow bullets blow all the way through without the shock effect, just a neat hole, the animal runs a short distance and bleeds out.