|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 22, 2016 10:58:56 GMT -7
I'd love to have a conversation about this awesome cartridge. I love the 45-70 above all others, because it dangles power and versatility like a carrot that I can't resist. However, as awesome as it is, I feel that the specific place I want to run it, is a bit of a challenge due to powder selection (or those I have tried so far).
The goal for me is to get an accurate load for my Browning 1886 with a MV of 1450FPS (give or take) using a cast bullet of 350-450 grains. It needs to shoot accurately in cold weather as well as warm. I would be happy with 1.5" groups on demand at 100 yards, and 3.5" at 200 yards.
The problem is that all the loads I have tried in this range have been less than ideal, and accuracy doesn't seem to improve till I use a powder that fills the case better.
I have tried loads with faster powders that used dacron to fill the empty case space, but they are not reliable session to session. I have tried lower end loads of 3031 that seem to be all that and a bag of chips, but the steel butt plate on my 1886 makes them perfect training wheels for a flinch.
I considered using Black Powder (not Pyrodex), and I'm willing if that's the only viable solution, but I really want a smokeless option.
I'm feeling my way forward as I can, and working through loads with each powder and bullet design I see as a good option (I'm working with the Lyman 457483 right now), but I would love to hear what others have found to work well.
Thanks!
|
|
urny
Bullet Head
Posts: 39
|
Post by urny on Jan 22, 2016 11:50:38 GMT -7
May I ask why not Pyrodex? My limited exposure to Pyrodex in .38-55, .45 Colt, .38 Special, and .30-30 has been to restricted to prove much one way or the other. Have you used it enough to have formed a negative opinion of it?
|
|
|
Post by todddoyka on Jan 22, 2016 12:43:45 GMT -7
i have a 45-70 in a handi-rifle. i use trapdoor loads for it, mostly because i don't like the recoil. i use a 405gr fbfn with 35.0gr of h4198 that goes roughly 1400fps. i also used the 405gr with trail boss but i can't find the load. i also have but not used is unique, reloader 7, varget and h322.
mine love goes to the 444 marlin. its a tc encore with a 23" MGM barrel.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 22, 2016 16:20:37 GMT -7
May I ask why not Pyrodex? My limited exposure to Pyrodex in .38-55, .45 Colt, .38 Special, and .30-30 has been to restricted to prove much one way or the other. Have you used it enough to have formed a negative opinion of it? Pyrodex can be a superb propellant, but it's not worth it for what it does (and keeps doing) to your firearm. I am a gunsmith, and I have to clean up after the stuff all the time. If you don't evacuate every last trace of residue from your rifle (which is practically impossible) you will have a constant battle with rust for about 4 months after the last usage of it. In fact, I can take my borescope and tell if a firearm has EVER been fired with Pyrodex. It leaves a tell tale corrosion in the barrel that is unique to itself. I did a side by side comparison of Pyrodex to Goex. I had two muzzle loaders I did not care about. One had been fired with nothing but Pyrodex, and the other had been fired with nothing but Goex. I fired ten shots through each of them, and set them in the rack side by side for three months. After three months, the Pyrodex gun had washed over the lock and the barrel with rough, orange, rust. This rust was impossible to remove with solvents, and the pitting was deep. The rifle that was fired with Goex was washed over with a white powder that was dotted with small specks of orange rust. The residue was easily cleaned off with soapy water (in fact, just plain water would make this residue feel slick to the touch and solved it easily). After cleaning the Goex rifle, although there was rust present, it was not nearly as deep as the Pyrodex rifle had demonstrated. Both rifles were thoroughly cleaned, oiled, and put back in the rack. After another 2 months, the Pyrodex rifle had regained about half of the orange rust that I had scrubbed off, especially in the barrel, while the Goex rifle still looked as clean as the day I had oiled it. So that's why I hate Pyrodex, and no firearm of mine will ever be used to burn another spec of the stuff.
|
|
urny
Bullet Head
Posts: 39
|
Post by urny on Jan 23, 2016 13:51:55 GMT -7
Thank you for your insightful reply. My own limited experiments, which except for .38-55 ended thirty years or so ago, have not left me with any memory of similar rust attacks, but it was a long time ago. The .38.55 was perhaps twenty years ago. None of those guns are around now for followup. I guess I'll take the safe course and avoid the stuff.
I'm wondering if other black powder substitutes have similar problems.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 23, 2016 21:48:26 GMT -7
I have heard good things about 777, but my thought is that if I'm going to shoot black, then I'm going to shoot real BLACK. 99% of the folks around here use Pyrodex though, so I can't speak from personal experience.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 26, 2016 12:45:55 GMT -7
I really think that a lever gun in 475 Linebaugh would be a more suitable cartridge, and easier to get accuracy from. Get more shots in the mag tube, and you're chunking bigger lead. I like the sound of that.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Jan 26, 2016 12:59:13 GMT -7
If you have one of the Rossi 92 in 480 Ruger, it probably would be possible to modify it to the 475.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 26, 2016 13:14:58 GMT -7
I don't have one, and it's awful hard to find one. With a rifle like that, there's no reason to convert to 475.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Jan 26, 2016 14:08:48 GMT -7
They are a bit hard to come by. I shot myself with the 454 version.....
|
|
urny
Bullet Head
Posts: 39
|
Post by urny on Jan 27, 2016 8:14:56 GMT -7
You shot yourself? There must be a story in that.
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 27, 2016 8:30:26 GMT -7
In big bore straight wall cases using mid weight for caliber bullets 4198 is about optimum for burn rate. With the high expansion ratio of the big bores the burn rate has to be relatively fast compared to smaller bores. When I was working with the 50 AK I found some information from Wolf Publishing that pegged 4198 as optimum for large bore straight wall cases and found it worked well for me not only in 50 cal but 45 cal as well.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Jan 27, 2016 8:48:36 GMT -7
You shot yourself? There must be a story in that. Just about 2 years ago. A story and a lesson. And then people wonder why im not comfortable carrying a firearm with a round chambered.
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Jan 27, 2016 17:07:31 GMT -7
Howdy Goodsteel I have a repro 50-95 that I shoot 3F Goex in under a 350 grainer and it does 1465 fps cronographed at 12 feet. I would think if you rechambered that 86 to 45-90 you could come real close with 3F. It burns real clean and I never get any blow back in the chamber.
5744 will easily get you there also. I found in that 50-95 it takes a lot of space in the case, easily ignites and easily could have taken velocity to 1600 fps. I stopped at 1465 as that was what I looking for. But 3F still stands as the most accurate load I have ever used in any straight wall cartridge. 5744 cams close but 3Fis still the best.
The Swiss black powder will give a good 10% fps so that just may do it in the 45-70. But 45-90 would be easier. Just so happens a feller on Paco's is selling a passle of 45-90 brass right now. Mike in Peru
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 27, 2016 19:35:49 GMT -7
Thanks for the reply bullshop. I'll give 4198 another look. My first try with that powder in my guide gun showed it to be right in between "wretched" and "you gotta be kiddin me?!?!?". 5744 was another highly touted disappointment in that rifle. The two powders that gave best accuracy in that four powder test was IMR4227 and Aliant 2400, both of which have been the focus of my attention for the past year or two. All that testing was done with the RD350 bullet with Hornady GCs. However, there are several things that has me wondering. First, the rifle I used for that test was the Marlin Guide Gun with an 18" barrel, and now I am using a Marlin 1895SS and a Browning 1886, both wearing longer barrels. Second, after reading your excellent documentation of shooting bullets with and without a GC, I am wondering if that may have had something to do with it. I'm thinking (dangerous I know) that the reason you had lousy results with the GC bullets was because there was not enough pressure to really warrant their use, nor to use them effectively. I think it is just barely possible that I may be creating the same situation here by using GCs at low pressure/velocities. A good friend of mine is dead set against using GCs of any kind in the 45-70, and I am really starting to wonder if I should either ditch them completely, or anneal them dead soft. It would be a trip if my results matched yours in that regard. I will revisit 4198 on my next outing and see what the targets tell me. I have recently fabricated a new peep sight which will go a long way towards helping me to shoot a decent group with this rifle. The stock rear sight was terrible.
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 27, 2016 23:09:38 GMT -7
Interesting sight. Close enough to your eye to work good but not close enough to hurt yourself. I will try to remember to show a picture of another interesting receiver sight I have. It works on a cam adjusting syustem and is calibrated in 10 yard increments to 200 yards. A cam is only correct for a specific weight range at a specific velocity but stay within those brackets and it works good.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 28, 2016 4:28:31 GMT -7
Sights are a personal study of mine Dan. I would be very interested to see photos of what you describe. I designed the sight above, specifically so that I wouldn't have to drill and tap my engraved receiver. I wanted windage and elevation in the smallest package I could come up with. I am really liking the whole concept though. You know what they say: necessity is the mother of invention! I was considering doing a ladder tang sight, but decided against it. Here's my first attempt:
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 28, 2016 7:45:26 GMT -7
Getting back to the original subject of this thread, isn't it a strange pickle the 45-70 finds itself in? It was designed for shooting black powder and the case capacity mirrors that. We all know that one of the things that guarantees consistent performance from range session to range session is a powder that properly fills the case, but with this cartridge, trailboss is the only one that comes close, and results with that stuff are iffy at best.
Therefore, the 45-70 only finds itself in the target shooting arena when it is loaded with BP. The only other widely accepted use of this cartridge is as a sort of pocket elephant gun that kills on both ends.
If you're looking for target quality performance in the 1400-1500 feet per second range, it simply does not exist. Strange there is no smokeless powder that works like this. Or is there? A friend of mine has demonstrated very noticeable accuracy using surplus cannon powder. I may give that a try. It certainly seemed to fit all the criteria for a good load, including properly filling the case.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Jan 28, 2016 8:02:42 GMT -7
You mentioned trailboss, and I have another suggestion that is right in the same burnrate as reddot and trailboss. Hodgen Titewad. Its one click slower then reddot but much more fluffy so it fills the case better with a equall weight charge.
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 28, 2016 8:36:04 GMT -7
Tim I will respectfully disagree with this, ""If you're looking for target quality performance in the 1400-1500 feet per second range, it simply does not exist"" and offer and explanation. There is maybe a venue you have not yet explored yet in duplex loading of smokeless powder. Like your friend you mentioned using cannon powder I use very slow burning and very cheap surplus powder in duplex loading with my long range 45-70. My rifle is one of the first run Browning 1885 rifles that came competition ready with good sights and beautiful wood minus the high gloss finish typical of earlier Brownings. This rifle is capable of shooting MOA with tailored loads and these duplex loads shoot to the full potential of the rifle. I used this load at the Quiggley shoot and did very well there with it. For this type long range target shooting I use the Lyman 500gn spritzer and the velocity is just a tad over 1400 fps starting out. I understand that some folks just will not try duplexing because of the lack of published data and I respect that but if a search for data is made it will not come up empty. Anyway Tim you know when ever you say never its akin to throwing down the gauntlet and some old cranky know it all type like myself just cant stand to leave it there.
|
|
lmg
Bullet Head
Posts: 8
|
Post by lmg on Jan 28, 2016 9:20:00 GMT -7
If I'm shooting BP in my TDs I prefer a duplex load of 4759 under BP. I have a carbine load that runs 1150 fps and 2 rifle loads; 405 HB at 1300 - 1350 fps and the 500 Rapine 460500 at 1250 fps. The nice thing about the duplex loads is they shoot a lot cleaner and no blow tube is needed. I've shot 100+ rounds through my H&R LBH carbine TD w/o cleaning and accuracy was as excellent with the last shots as with the first shots.
Larry Gibson
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 28, 2016 11:57:25 GMT -7
Larry what size black powder do you prefer for duplexing in the 45-70?
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 28, 2016 13:50:32 GMT -7
Duplexing is an option I would rather not consider. Is that the only option left on the table?
|
|
lmg
Bullet Head
Posts: 8
|
Post by lmg on Jan 28, 2016 14:33:59 GMT -7
Larry what size black powder do you prefer for duplexing in the 45-70? I used to use and preferred GOEX Cartridge but also use GOEX 3f. I haven't bought any in a while so I don't know what's currently available these days. I've had 20 lbs of DuPont 3f for many years and decided to use it up. Down to about 6 lbs. I developed the loads years ago after some tutelage by Spence Wolf.
Larry Gibson
|
|
lmg
Bullet Head
Posts: 8
|
Post by lmg on Jan 28, 2016 14:44:22 GMT -7
Duplexing is an option I would rather not consider. Is that the only option left on the table? No, here is 10 shots at 100 yards from my H&R OM TD using a 415 gr hard cast commercial (deal on Midway) loaded over 37 gr milsurp IMR4895 with a 1 1/2 gr Dacron filler.
Larry Gibson
Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 28, 2016 14:46:31 GMT -7
Duplexing is an option I would rather not consider. Is that the only option left on the table? Well another angle I have seen but never used is reduced capacity cases. I once read an article about making them by inserting a smaller capacity case inside the larger one. In 45-70 it might be something like a 308 win. I have also seen for sale reduced capacity cases turned from bare stock. If your making those you can make the internal volume about anything you want.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 28, 2016 21:19:34 GMT -7
So Dan, say I take the plunge and work up a duplex load for my 45-70 using WC860 and 4198 as a kicker. What bullet, alloy, and lube do you find best in this situation?
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 28, 2016 22:45:22 GMT -7
Same as any other situation roughly match the hardness to the pressure. Unless you have pressure equipment all you really have to go on is velocity. If you have a 400gn ish bullet doing 1400 fps using a slow burning powder chances are pressure is pretty low. Air cooled WW will be sufficient for this. Since we now normally depend on finished bullet diameter to make the gas seal and not obturation hard alloy will work too. I once shot a long range gong match at Buffalo Gap North Dakota. I was also a bullet vendor at this match. During a target painting break someone approached me wanting the type of bullets I was shooting, I was doing well. I had several boxes of the same bullet in air cooled ww that I was shooting. I gave him those and he asked if I had any more available. I told him all I had left was what was loaded in my ammo but that since I didn't size my cases I could slip them out and he could have those too and he took them. I had for sale more of the same design but quench hardened. The air cooled batch at about BHN-9 and the quenched batch at about BHN-20. I replaced the soft bullets with the hard ones and went on to finish the match and never missed a beat. My 800 yard sight setting stayed the same and I was the only one in my squad that went 8 for 8 at 800. After experiencing that I don't get too excited about small changes in hardness as long as the softest alloy I will be using is at least adequate for the pressure I am shooting them to. BTW where did you come up with the WC-860 and 4198? That sounds awfully close to what I was using. Anyway you have the right idea with powders. These type of smokless powder duplex loads work better with heavier bullets than with light. I would try to not go less than 400gn. Lube? Really !!! need you ask? At that time it would have to have been Speed Green. If I was to shoot a match today I would use Lotak. At the low pressures these loads work at lube seems not to be much of a problem. These loads do not completely consume the powder and some is being blown out the barrel. That is really the reason for the duplex to blow unburned powder out the barrel so the chamber is not cluttered with powder causing loading issues, brass dents and such. I believe that to some extent that the powder deterrent coatings from the unburned powder passing down the bore acts as a lube so you are getting a double lube action in the bore one from the bullet lube and one from the unburned powder.
|
|
|
Post by goodsteel on Jan 29, 2016 6:22:29 GMT -7
Same as any other situation roughly match the hardness to the pressure. Unless you have pressure equipment all you really have to go on is velocity. If you have a 400gn ish bullet doing 1400 fps using a slow burning powder chances are pressure is pretty low. Air cooled WW will be sufficient for this. Since we now normally depend on finished bullet diameter to make the gas seal and not obturation hard alloy will work too. I once shot a long range gong match at Buffalo Gap North Dakota. I was also a bullet vendor at this match. During a target painting break someone approached me wanting the type of bullets I was shooting, I was doing well. I had several boxes of the same bullet in air cooled ww that I was shooting. I gave him those and he asked if I had any more available. I told him all I had left was what was loaded in my ammo but that since I didn't size my cases I could slip them out and he could have those too and he took them. I had for sale more of the same design but quench hardened. The air cooled batch at about BHN-9 and the quenched batch at about BHN-20. I replaced the soft bullets with the hard ones and went on to finish the match and never missed a beat. My 800 yard sight setting stayed the same and I was the only one in my squad that went 8 for 8 at 800. After experiencing that I don't get too excited about small changes in hardness as long as the softest alloy I will be using is at least adequate for the pressure I am shooting them to. I agree with you on your statements of alloy choice. It's not that I have not messed with duplex, I just prefer not to unless there is no alternative, which is the reason for me starting this thread. I was not aware of that. Thank's for the tip! I guess it just helps with pressure to aid the powder burning? One thing about me Dan, I always ask, whether I need to or not. Bad habit I guess. LOL! Yeah BUT, speed increases as well. Part of that is the kicker, but I think a certain part of that is the slow powder getting lit a little more than normal wouldn't you say? Regardless, you're right. It's awfully nice to have a clean barrel after the shot. Now there's an interesting statement. One of my client's HV 30XCB barrels went from shooting about 1.5MOA @ 2700FPS to over 2MOA. He thought maybe he had burned the barrel out shooting HV with Linotype. Well, he sent the rifle back for inspection, and when I checked out the throat, there was this black crystalline stuff coating it and extending 4" down the barrel. I tried to scrub it out with a bronze brush, but it wouldn't be touched. I ended up wrapping steel wool around the brush and scrubbing the tarnation out of it, and finally got it cleared. This client had a habbit of shooting raw WC867 because even though it only gave 2300FPS or so, and left unburnt powder in the barrel, it was very very accurate until it all began to fall apart. I believe that was powder deterrent that was coating the first 4" of his barrel and reducing the diameter of the bullet. This probably wouldn't be as much of an issue at lower speeds, but it's still there, and should be kept in the back of one's mind (along with the fact that this gentleman was shooting my XCB bullet design which has very small lube grooves). Another thought I have about these powders is that the unburnt powder acts as kind of a filler behind the bullet? That was suggested by a fellow on another forum, and I think the idea has merit.
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Jan 29, 2016 8:32:28 GMT -7
About the lube thingy when I said " need you ask" I was not trying to be a smart ax just trying to be funny. About the heavier bullets seemingly working better with these type smokeless powder duplex loads I believe you hit it on the head in that the greater resistance to movement of the increased bullet weight aids the powder burn. Here is an interesting tidbit I picked up from the late Harvey Donaldson that in some way sheds light on this. Harvey said that with any bullet weight there is an optimum powder burn rate as well as powder volume per any cartridge. Once you find that volume it stays the same when you increase bullet weight but the burn rate gets slower. Harvey was referring to the IMR series of powders as that is what was available at the time he said this. Heres an example say you are loading a 30-06 with 125gn bullets and find the optimum burn rate for this bullet weight is imr 4198 and you find a setting on your powder drop that gives best results with this powder and bullet weight. Now once you find that volume and begin to go up in bullet weight what you find is that the powder drop stays at the same setting but the powder burn rate gets progressively slower as bullet weight increases. When I first read this I thought it sounded like bunk but keeping what Harvey said in mind checked it out when opportunity allowed. What I learned was that Harvey knew what he was about and my respect for his writing grew. So this is related to our discussion in that we are using a very slow powder in a large caliber so the optimum bullet weight for this slow a powder will be extremely heavy. It just stands to reason that as you get closer to that weight it will work better. Yes bullet velocity does increase with the duplexing but not significantly so and as would be expected the increase in velocity is dependent on the burn rate and volume of the kicker powder. In my own work in duplexing of this type I am not looking for increased velocity because increased velocity means increased pressure and since we are working with unknowns lower pressure is safer pressure. As I said earlier my reason for duplexing these type powders is only to get a cleaner burn that allows continued loading without having to resort to any acrobatics with the rifle. In shooting at a match the muzzle has to remain pointed down range or you are asked to leave. Its really hard to blow unburned powder out from the breach so you can see the problem. Very interesting about what you found in your friends rifle. I remember reading about a similar condition in the early years of Camp Perry high power competition. These fellas were dipping there 30-40 and 30-06 bullets in grease just before firing, bullet only. They believed there were several benefits to this. The long tern results were exactly as you described a burnt on hard fouling ring that was reducing bullet diameter by several thousandths of an inch even with the jacketed bullets they were using. They sectioned some barrels and found this build up in the same location you describe and impossible to remove. That discovery brought an end to the practice. About the acting as a filler absolutely for sure because with this type of loading of a necessity the load is always at 100+ percent density. The powders can not be allowed to mix so these loads are always slightly compressed.
|
|