BC Throat

[Big Blue]

Most of the guys using the .223, and ,308 rifles from H+R/NEF have all seen the deep throats in those guns. I'm looking at using some long nosed hard cast bullets for the 45/70 BC and wanted to know if they would fit in the throat before I buy them. Does anyone have information of the depth of the throat in the BC? Thanks.
Don

[handirifle]

Big Blue
My BC was the opposite of the 223's.  It would not let me seat long bullets out very far at all.  The 2.55 COAL is pretty darn close to max.  You might squeeze 2.7, might.

[elblerinnv]

Hi guys, second attempt to post this.  I don't know what I wrong the first time.  See if I can do it wrong again.

Like Handirifle's BC, my Target Model has almost no throat, can't seat those long Lyman Postell's out where I want them.  However, my friend DT has a year old TM that has quite a long throat, and larger bore and groove diameter's to boot.  Maybe the older guns are not representative of the newer models.  Just a thought.

Maybe I should take this opportunity to reintroduce myself here.  Was #4, I think, on the old forum at H&R/NEF, sorry to see it go.  Not one of the most knowledgeable members of the fraternity, so don't post much, but I love to read what the better informed, and more widely experienced members post about their experiences and firearms.  We only have one .22 Sportster (grandson), two .243's (grandson, daughter-in-law), one .30-30 (wife), one .38-55 Target Model (meself), and one 20 gauge (late son, will most likely go to grandson).  The other grandchildren will get new ones as they reach appropriate (12) age.

I love to cast rifle bullets, and everyone of age in the family likes shooten 'em.  Red Dot, Black Powder, and Turk Surplus Powder (TSP), are the favorites.

This got longer than I had intended.  Try to control myself in the future.

Respectfully,
Ernie

[JPH45]

Big Blue, for some odd reason, H&R/NEF seems to vasilate on the chamberings which have long throats. the most common offenders seem to be the high power rounds like 223, 25-06, 308, etc. The 357 Magnum also seems to suffer form this calamity, while the 44 Magnum is perfectly in line with the chamber of a Ruger Blackhawk... go figure. I have not had a chance to see what my 45-70 throat is yet, (Handi barrel 22"), but my 30-30 also seems to be within the relm of normal 30-30 throats......I think there are some chamberings that have been around for so long that H&R/NEF had to follow established throats. the 30-30 and 45-70 are perfect examples.

Everyone who posted at the old site complained of the 45-70 throat and 500 grain bullets. This is perfectly in keeping with the 45-70 Springfield. The 45-70 was originally loaded with a 500 grain ball, and everyone complained of the recoil. (seems to be a recurring problem :-) )The ball was changed to the now standard 405. The Cavalry however continued to complain that the light carbines they were issued continued to be excessive in recoil, and a 55 grain powder charge loading was developed and issued to the Cavalry. It still used the 405 grain bullet. The throat was changed between the 500 and 405 grain balls, and examples of each length can be found through out the production of all 45-70's civilian and military.

Ruger began production of the #1 and #3 with the longer 500 grain ball throat, yet has recently begun using the shorter 405 throat. My Browning 1885 had the short throat (manufactured in 1988) I do not know what the current trend is for guns intended for the black powder silhoutte gang. I stopped keeping up with 45-70 stuff years back. Hope this helps some. JP

[Haywire Haywood]

My BC was also very short (bought it about 2 months ago), a friend of mine gave me some 300gr cast bullets to try and I was surprised to have to load them fairly short to get them to chamber.  I had the-man-on-the-other-forum-who's-name-I-can't-mention-here throat mine and now it's much better.  I haven't shot it since the throating job but I can load bullets out a little farther now.

Ian

[Big Blue]

Thanks for the tips guys. I hate to buy a box of bullets just to find they don't fit. Bullets cost enough as it is and to waste them is almost a sin. What cast ammo have you guys used that do fit well? I like hard cast loads for hunting in my .44 mag. and thought to try them in this gun. The .44 mag. I have has Ballard rifling, but this BC is a more shallow rifling, would this style rifling still work with the hard cast loads, or should I look at something softer?
Don

[Haywire Haywood]

I'm a rank amateur when it comes to casting and shooting cast but it seems to me that with shalllow rifling that will have a minimal grip on the boolit that the harder the boolit you shoot, the better the boolit will grip the shallow lands rather than strip thru.  If I am off base on this I am sure the more experienced will speak up.  Hopefully someone will gimme a pat on the back and tell me I'm right.  :wink:

Ian

[Badnews Bob]

I don't know hardly anything about this yet but I'm  learning.  :?  But let me tell you about this Haywire critter don't believe nuttin he says he's a nut  and should be put away a  regular phycho.... wait a minute.... I hang out  with the guy and go shootin with him.... whats that make me? :eek:  :eek: Ok maybe he is alright after all :lol:

[JPH45]

Haywire, the jury is vasilating. Dependig on who and what you beleive, harder is better. The only proof I have of that is this....In my 44 Magnum I have not been able to drive any cast bullet with predictable accuracy beyond 1300 fps. This includes examples of my own bults cast from Linotype, the quintisential hard alloy used by those who cast their own to solve a mutitude of sins including excessive leading  and inaccuracy caused by high velocity.

The exception to this has been Magnus Bullet Co. #704 300 grain . Not only did this bullet turn in astounding 1" groups, it did so at the amazing velocity of 1450 fps :eek: This bullet is equally as hard as Linotype at 21-22 BHN

Marlins Micro Groove barrels have long had a reutation for being inaccurate with cst bullets at velocities greatr than 1600 fps and many say one can't get there.

The naysayers of the arguement swear by two things.....hard bullets, and changing the throat lead angle to 1.5 degrees. Advocates of the lead angle change say that even soft bullets respond well to velocity increases. Not having done this I cannot testify to it's veracity.

I can say this, that as a bullet diameter increases, I am very inclined to believe that the rotational loads on the bullet surface decrease. I have not ever had the trouble getting 44 and 45 caliber bullets to shoot well as I have had with 30's. This and a dollar will buy a cup of coffee. it is strictly based on general observation and could just as easily be attributed to other factors. I do however have no qualms saying that I have found it no mean task to get good accuracy from most any 45 caliber bullet, while 357's tend to be quite picky, and I quit trying to get 30's to shoot, although some seem to have no difficulty. Go figure.

Like you, I continue to wait for an authority on the subject, but none will state matter of factly......

[Haywire Haywood]

Another thought from the novice...  seems logical to me that shooting the heaviest bullet that the twist rate would stabilize would give the most bearing surface for the lands to grip...

then again, maybe I think too much.

Ian