Who Needs 450 Bushmaster When There's The 45-70?

[redneck2]

If you eliminate duplicate cartridges, about 90% of the rifle racks would be empty

 

[medic68]

Likewise. Dont like the thread? Don't click on the thread.
Your permission and/or approval is not needed, thanks

Couldn't have said it better. Appreciate your time.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Why the self imposed restriction?

It really isn't, but it is a common discussion point amongst the "prepper" community, to the extent such a community exists. However, if there is a self-imposed restriction, it is only amongst that group and likely driven by a) logistics - the need to stock only 5 calibers of ammo but in great quantities, and b) the inability for a single person to relocate with a 30 firearm collection and the accompanying 20+ different calibers (again, logistics)

But that's an entirely different discussion.

 

[Dustbowl]

On the 45/70 in bolt rifle. I’ve seen a 45/70 built on a mosin-nagant action. It was an ugly gun but that thing shot 5 rounds in a 1 1/2 inch group at 100 yards. Fed every round too. It was a sight to behold.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

The only thing that a 450 Bushmaster, 458 SOCOM and 50 Beowulf bring to the table is the ability to give similar ballistics to the 45/70 out of an AR-15 action. That alone, is pretty impressive. If you are happy with your lever action, there’s no need to buy another rifle. Your 45/70 actually does everything better than the 450 Bushmaster as far as the cartridges are concerned. Some people just prefer semiautos and I don’t know of a semiauto 45/70.

I love semiautos.... in about everything except a 45/70 and then I am an old school traditionalist and like my 45/70 in a lever action. Even if a 45/70 were available in a semi auto, I wouldn’t buy one.

 

[rdnktrkr]

I've been looking at the 450BM and the 458 socom trying to decide which one, I have a reproduction single shot and Marlin in 45-70 and enjoy them, but in an AR platform I wouldn't care if it gets scratched or dropped ( Marlin has been both scratched and dropped on the same day )

 

[tark]

I have a Frankenmosin. Mine is only a single shot. Ruger barrel and sights. Kicks like a mule with hot loads but very accurate.

 

[jmorris]

Who Needs 450 Bushmaster When There's The 45-70?

Anyone that doesn’t want to shoot .452 bullets vs. .458 bullets. If they did want to shoot the .458’s in an AR15, they would just get a 458 socom instead. The rimmed 45-70 isn’t the best for that or even a barrel conversion on a “standard” 308 family bolt rifle.

I have semiautos in 458 socom and 450 BM and a lever in 45-70. They all kill stuff, but “marlin” reloads in the lever gun and it recoils worse than my 50 BMG. 3 of them leaves a bruise that lasts a week but it only takes one to stop anything I have hit with them.

Brings up a good point though. The two smaller case volume rounds keep up with factory 45-70 energy levels. Reload the 45-70 in a modern firearm and it walks away from both.

 

[LoonWulf]

Reload the 45-70 in a modern firearm and it walks away from both.

Course then you might as well consider a .458 Winchester
Unless of course the action in use does better with a rimmed cartridge, then I'd opt for a .450/400!

 

[eastbank]

the 45-70 does things with lower pressure than the other newer .452-458 cartiges, my .460 ruger # 1 operates in the 50,000-60,000 psi ranges.

 

[Slamfire]

the 45-70 does things with lower pressure than the other newer .452-458 cartiges, my .460 ruger # 1 operates in the 50,000-60,000 psi ranges.

If you can do the same job at lower pressures, you will have less problems and the mechanism and your brass will last longer. This trend to higher and higher pressures seems to have hit a limit with brass case construction, but talking to a cartridge manufacturer at a match, maybe not. The newest cartridge designs deliberately raise combustion pressures in the cartridge throat, but what the cartridge manufacturer was worried about, were case heads blowing with those design. There is a limit to what pressures brass case heads can hold, and to the thickness of case sidewalls.

What drives the pressures is sales and the pseudo science of lethality used in marketing. Velocity sells, kinetic energy sells, so the marketing departments keep bumping up the pressures. No one ever reports on the stuck cases or blown primers. Malfunctions are ignored, but the higher your cartridge pressures, the more malfunctions you will have, due to small things that cause the pressure to spike. The slope of the pressure curve is exponential and tiny differences will raise pressures at rates, that humans do not comprehend. We were not evolved to think in exponential terms.

On another forum a gentleman was shooting his Ulfberht in 338 Lapua Magnum and the thing was locking up on the 5th round. And I mean locking up to the point the weapon had to be sent back for a rebuild. That 338 Lapua Magnum is a 61,000 psia round. That is too hot, in my opinion, for a gas gun mechanism, but, its the power that sells, and everyone ignores the potential for malfunctions.

You would think the shooting community would learn from its mistakes



But, it hasn't.

 

[troy fairweather]

Course then you might as well consider a .458 Winchester
Unless of course the action in use does better with a rimmed cartridge, then I'd opt for a .450/400!

I have loaded what I call class 4 loads in my Siamese mauser. They duplicated some 458wm loads. Now I just use a mild to warm class 2 marlin load. The hot ones just give me headaches when I shoot to many.

 

[jmorris]

the 45-70 does things with lower pressure than the other newer .452-458 cartiges, my .460 ruger # 1 operates in the 50,000-60,000 psi ranges.

Yes the out of the box stuff to the trap door rifles runs 25,000cup. The marlin 1895’s that were designed to handle the 444 marlin can operate safety at 40,000cup. Even stronger actions like the Ruger #1, Browning 78, Siamese Mauser etc can operate at 50,000cup.

Why anyone that reloads had little interest in the 450 Marlin, it was just a 45-70, loaded to potential with a belt on it so you couldn’t chamber it in antiques.

 

[Varminterror]

That 338 Lapua Magnum is a 61,000 psia round. That is too hot, in my opinion, for a gas gun mechanism, but, its the power that sells, and everyone ignores the potential for malfunctions.

Too hot, when the second most popular and second most prevalent semiauto rifle cartridge in the world, behind the 223/5.56, is a 62,000psi round? And it’s predecessor a 60,000psi round?

The big 338 semiauto rifles might have some bolt thrust issues, and certainly some reciprocating mass velocity issues of the gas isn’t managed appropriately, but it’s hardly a problem of their design pressure specification.

 

[Varminterror]

These threads - whining as they are - make no sense to me. If a .45-70 is great and you like it - which it is and you should - then poo-pooing a comparable round to feel better about your personal toy is nothing above childish. Heavy hitters, such we call them, are popular. Not everyone wants a levergun - but a .45-70 won’t fit nor feed from an AR, so a mini-length version was created which does and will.

Not so dissimilar to the relationship between a .45 colt revolver and a 1911 pistol, a hundred years before. A new package, a semiauto nonetheless, came available, wrapped around a cartridge with relatively similar performance, but in a smaller case. Certainly many folks booed and hissed at the change from a Service Revolver to a 1911 at the time, especially considering none were even shooting a single action 45 colt revolver any longer, but rather were trading a double action 38spcl or 357mag for the 1911. But a hundred years later, that disdain is forgotten and the 1911 is now a “classic,” and the venerable .45acp vaunted for its stopping power prowess...

So today, we have someone who enjoys his old 45-70, but feels insecure that a cartridge, more than a decade on the market, is threatening similar performance, wrapped in a completely different format of firearm. Leverguns will never again be as popular as the AR-15, so the discussion of 450b vs. 45-70 isn’t really about the ballistic similarities, and pretending it is such is just naive.

I appreciate there really are folks out there who believe we should all be shooting the same 6 cartridges and same 6 firearms and all wearing the same boots, driving the same trucks, eating the same meals. I also appreciate that I don’t call any of them my friends. Many cartridges live happily at my bench, and many firearms chambered for them.

 

[Trey Veston]

These threads - whining as they are - make no sense to me. If a .45-70 is great and you like it - which it is and you should - then poo-pooing a comparable round to feel better about your personal toy is nothing above childish. Heavy hitters, such we call them, are popular. Not everyone wants a levergun - but a .45-70 won’t fit nor feed from an AR, so a mini-length version was created which does and will.

Not so dissimilar to the relationship between a .45 colt revolver and a 1911 pistol, a hundred years before. A new package, a semiauto nonetheless, came available, wrapped around a cartridge with relatively similar performance, but in a smaller case. Certainly many folks booed and hissed at the change from a Service Revolver to a 1911 at the time, especially considering none were even shooting a single action 45 colt revolver any longer, but rather were trading a double action 38spcl or 357mag for the 1911. But a hundred years later, that disdain is forgotten and the 1911 is now a “classic,” and the venerable .45acp vaunted for its stopping power prowess...

So today, we have someone who enjoys his old 45-70, but feels insecure that a cartridge, more than a decade on the market, is threatening similar performance, wrapped in a completely different format of firearm. Leverguns will never again be as popular as the AR-15, so the discussion of 450b vs. 45-70 isn’t really about the ballistic similarities, and pretending it is such is just naive.

I appreciate there really are folks out there who believe we should all be shooting the same 6 cartridges and same 6 firearms and all wearing the same boots, driving the same trucks, eating the same meals. I also appreciate that I don’t call any of them my friends. Many cartridges live happily at my bench, and many firearms chambered for them.

Good post. But your entire point could have been summed up with a single meme...

 

[Varminterror]

Good post. But your entire point could have been summed up with a single meme...

My comments here don’t have anything to do with what I like or don’t like in firearms. But rather, I don’t care for grown-ass men sitting around pouting about new cartridges (not even new in this case) or new firearms which make them feel insecure about the firearms and cartridges they own, and I don’t care for the attention seeking behavior by which they post these threads to get pandered to and placated by other Luddites who share the same fear of obsolescence. The .45-70 is one of my favorite cartridges, and the Thumper AR cartridges like the 450b, 458soc, and 50beo are one of my favorite firearm paradigms - so the thread is actually about things I like - but this “that new girl Carol might be prettier than me, and the boys like her more, someone tell me I’m still pretty” BS is just embarrassing.

So if there were a meme for how I feel about this type of thread, it would be:

 

[medic68]

M But rather, I don’t care for grown-ass men sitting around pouting about new cartridges (not even new in this case) or new firearms which make them feel insecure about the firearms and cartridges they own, and I don’t care for the attention seeking behavior by which they post these threads to get pandered to and placated by other Luddites who share the same fear of obsolescence.

So if there were a meme for how I feel about this type of thread, it would be:

View attachment 859770

Some folks put way too much thought into simple things, simple questions. Like someone earlier said, don't like the thread then............ eh

 

[JeeperCreeper]

Let's not forget that forums exist to either share information or to entertain.

If we had a "checklist" for discussions and a "case closed" folder... and cut out all the BS stuff like caliber wars, best bear gun, wood vs synthetic, blued vs nitride, Glock vs everyone, the forum would be like 5 pages long.

Sometimes it's fun to BS about our hobbies.

Having said that, the 45/70 is archaic and the 450 Bushy should be adopted by the Navy SEALs.

 

[jmorris]

If a .45-70 is great and you like it - which it is and you should - then poo-pooing a comparable round to feel better about your personal toy is nothing above childish.

Also says you need more toys.

 

[Varminterror]

Also says you need more toys.

Here here!

 

[fireside44]

But rather, I don’t care for grown-ass men sitting around pouting about new cartridges (not even new in this case) or new firearms which make them feel insecure about the firearms and cartridges they own, and I don’t care for the attention seeking behavior by which they post these threads to get pandered to and placated by other Luddites who share the same fear of obsolescence.

Hey, there is nothing wrong with old guys complaining about also-ran cartridges coming out when they already have a closet full of classics. It should be expected. The past ten or so years has seen a bunch of new cartridges that don't do anything better than old stuff except one thing, work in AR-15's. Few have been real game changing calibers. I saw Savage is offering several bolt guns in 450 bushmaster that can use the Magpul AICS mags and when I looked at some cartridge numbers it's basically a .444 marlin which is great on deer, pigs, and more. Having loaded and shot that round quite few times I get interested when it looks like it's already generating factory and industry support and I have some casting and sizing goodies on hand now that are compatible already. The worst thing is new calibers where factory ammo becomes almost unobtainium within 5 years or reloading components you have to bring a jar of vaseline with you to the checkout counter to pay for.

 

[Varminterror]

there is nothing wrong with old guys complaining about also-ran cartridges coming out when they already have a closet full of classics. It should be expected.

While I do expect it, I vehemently disagree “there’s nothing wrong” with anyone, old or not, complaining about new products coming out, just because it is similar to something they have.

Ask a question - what’s different? - and an interesting conversation of facts can ensue. But this teenage-girl melodrama of “anything new is bad because I have something like it already that I like, and I’m threatened by anything which might become more popular” is just stupid.

The week this thread dropped, another like it was presented, asking for an objective comparison of 243win and 6 creedmoor. This thread, instead was proposed from a position of insecurity. Presentation is everything. The OP here could have simply said - I have a 45-70 in a levergun and don’t really need a semiautomatic, but it looks like the 450 Bushmaster performs similarly.” Instead, it was a whiny thread asking for someone to coddle his feelings. Both are repeats of the same tired questions we see on threads, of course, but one’s an interesting open ended and open minded discussion, one’s just embarrassing...

 

[greg_r]

My opinion....the 45/70 is the better cartridge. I do have a 450 Bushmaster though. 2 of them. I got on the kick that I need a Ruger American Ranch or Predator rifle in every caliber that is available in the MSR. Gives me an excuse to build a MSR I guess.

 

[Slamfire]

Too hot, when the second most popular and second most prevalent semiauto rifle cartridge in the world, behind the 223/5.56, is a 62,000psi round? And it’s predecessor a 60,000psi round?

You are just being your usually self: a provocateur. No one can be that ignorant.

The 30-06 was used World Wide and powder improvements allowed the cartridge to operate around 42-44,000 psia. The 7.62 also had a 50,000 cup pressure limit. Getting into the argument about psia and cup is fruitless, but the 7.62 usually ran well under 50,000 cup.

The 223 round was not so much “designed” as it was a wildcat. The guys who came up with the round wanted a certain velocity at a certain range. I read the 1971 Guns & Ammo article “The 223 is here to stay” by Robert Hutton. Robert Hutton was technical editor of Guns and Ammo magazine and must have been very wealthy as he owned a big piece of real estate in Topanga Canyon California called Hutton’s Shooting Ranch. The property is probably worth billion's now. Hutton’s article documents how he developed the 223 round. It was a vanity project by a rich elite who probably meant well. If you have any sort of technical background, it is apparent he is an amateur and his cartridge represents what an amateur would do. He took an existing cartridge, necked it up and down, blew the shoulder out, changed shoulder angles, he had a chronograph, got the velocity he wanted at distance. The crowning achievement in the article was punching holes in the wobble pot at 500 yards. That is about all the lethality testing Hutton did, punching holes in a helmet. He used the Powell Computer, a paper slide rule, to estimate pressures. He did not pressure test his cartridge he did not have a pressure curve. This cartridge was then adopted as the US service round. William Davis, the Government Technical Expert at the Icord hearings, said on the History Channel that the technical data provided the Government on the 223 round did come with a pressure curve. These guys developed a cartridge and never thought of documenting what the pressure curve looked like. Pressure curve is absolutely critical to the timing of an automatic weapon. How long energy is available, the maximum pressure and how fast it drops off is fundamental to the design of a automatic gas mechanism.

Hutton did not look at case hardness, taper, expansion or contraction. A professional would have looked at the expansion and contraction of the case in the chamber and adjusted case taper, thickness, and established case hardness in the sidewalls and case head. You would have to work with manufacturing to determine realistic hardness parameters throughout the case, but this is important as it affects the Young’s Modulus. As it turns out, the brass case 223 drags on extraction, there is not enough clearance between the case and chamber. Steel case is even worse. I have seen many failures to extract steel case ammunition on the firing line with AR15’s.

It turns out the 223 is fairly straight tapered. This was a fad, highly promoted by P.O Ackley, and widely copied. I am not a fan of very straight tapered cartridges. The one and only advantage of a very straight taper is maximizing the amount of powder you can get in the case. The wildcat era of the late 1940’s through the 1960’s was all about high velocity, and only high velocity. It was very one dimensional thinking, ignoring other aspects of cartridge design that are very important. One of the things you trade off for a straight case is that the cartridge does not “steer” well during feeding. Anyone can test this, which shape feeds better into the end of the tube, a taper, or a straight cylinder? Alignment to bore is important for feeding with all cartridges, but the really straight ones are going to jam up more often when alignment gets slightly out of whack. Straight cartridges will drag on extraction because the case walls are relaxing off the chamber walls in a straight line, not a diagonal. It turns out portions of the 223 case are still sticking to the chamber walls during extraction and a major reason for extractor lift. Understanding Extractor Lift in the M16 Family of Weapons www.dtic.mil/ndia/2003/smallarms/din.ppt This is very undesirable as jams will get you killed in combat. Lots of good American Boys died in Vietnam with jammed M16’s in their hands. Ideally, the case will be fully relaxed off the chamber walls during unlock and there will not be any resistance between case and chamber during the residual blowback period. If you look at good case design, the Russian 7.62 X 39 and the recent Chinese service cartridge, both have more case taper than the 5.56 Nato and both were designed with steel as a case material. Both have nice thick rims, which is also important for machine gun rounds.



As an example of the well thought out nature of these Chinese rounds, the 5.8mm operates at a much lower pressure than the US service round. It only generates a 41,500 psi (284 MPa) chamber pressure which is marginally higher than that of the old single-base propellant used by the vintage 7.62x39mm and much lower than the 5.56mm M855/SS109’s 55,000 psi (380 MPa). The current pressures of the latest 5.56 rounds have been kept out of public view, but it seems to be in the range of 62,000 to 65,000 psia. Considering the proof round is 70 kpsia, the Army is operating its cartridges at pressures that are guaranteed to crack bolt lugs very quickly. You see, the AR15 was designed for a 50 cup round, not a 65 kpsia round. Lower pressures means fewer failures to extract when the weapon gets hot, or the Trooper is in a hot environment. It is always true that doing the job at lower pressures is better than doing the job at higher pressures.

I have shot next to the service rifle teams. I saw them using Federal Gold medal match out to three hundred yards, and depending on the year, and service, they were either rolling their own, or using Federal and I saw the Marines using Black Hills match at 600 yards.

And, these guys were blowing primers. I don't have the Marine Black Hill ammunition picture, but the same day, same relay I picked these AMU cases, I have a hand full of Marine Black hill with blown primers.





The 223 is operating at such high pressures that it takes virtually nothing to create a blown primer. And that is a direct consequence of high operating pressures.

Implicit in your comment is the assumption that US arms and ammunition are picked for their technical merit. That is not true. The procurement process is highly political with groups inside and outside the Ordnance Bureau's fighting over doctrine, but mostly, over budget. The Military exists to serve the industrial sector, National Defense is way down on the list of actual priorities. This is the primary reason weapon systems are so expensive, but salaries are low and facilities are always falling apart.

Given the United States pre eminence post WW2 it makes sense, given massive foreign aid, the free weapons and munitions, we gave to "Allies" that they would adopt our cartridge. We bullied the British from adopting an excellent mid range round. If however, you notice, our European allies have created superior side arms to shoot the 5.56, and when NATO finally breaks up, they will probably adopt a better round.

The US never developed this round.



The Communist block did better in their selection of post WW2 service rounds, and I would say, based on distribution, the 7.62 X 39 is probably the number one service round in the world. Considering it is a 1940's design, it is still an outstanding intermediate round. That round was obviously selected because of its technical merit.

And geezers, China is not the Nation that you remember during the Kennedy era. China is now the lead in artificial intelligence. You probably don't understand what that means, but it is big, big, big. And you are looking at my post through a Chinese made electronic device. And, the chips were probably designed in China, or at least, they all will be in less than a decade. American Universities graduate more Chinese National PhD's than they do native Americans, and have been doing so for decades now. Someone can research the exact start date, but it has been awhile. It won't be long till the Chinese GDP passes the US GDP. We ought to take China for serious and it is only our ignorance, racism and hubris that prevents us from recognizing the professionalism that China exhibits in all areas of industry. The US ought to be buying modern Chinese small arms and issuing them to our troops instead of using the 1950's Stoner rifle and the Hutton wildcat round.