Author Topic: 45-70 "Short" (Read 2758 times)

Ololique · « **on:** January 11, 2007, 07:39:39 AM »

Ok, now before someone thinks I've totally flipped... Indiana is proposing certain cartridges be legalized for deer hunting. Right now, the proposal is cartridges .357" or larger with a minimum case length of 1.16" and a max length of 1.625". I've made a prototype 45-70 "Short", trimmed to 1.625". Lee makes custom case length gauges and custom factory crimp dies. So far, my first load is 45.0gr of RL-7 with a 300gr Rem HP. It cycles very well through my GG, but I haven't fired it yet. I may wait until I can get a crimp die. Does anyone see anything glaring wrong with doing this that I have overlooked? Any and all input is appreciated!!

LEO · « **Reply #1 on:** January 11, 2007, 07:53:12 AM »

I don't have a loading manual handy so I am not sure where the 45 gr of RL 7 falls in the 45-70 load spectrum, and you may have already considered this that when you reduce case volume then the same load produces higher pressures. Aside from that, I think you may be onto something, although I am not sure if you will gain anything over a 454 velocity wise, it will enable you to use heavier bullets in a platform that you already own. Also if they don't pass the law you will not be out a whole lot of money and will have had fun experimenting. Let us know how it works out.

35Rem · « **Reply #2 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:05:24 AM »

Well, If they right the law correctly it will not allow a firearm to be used that CAN chamber the longer correct ammunition. Therefore, if your gun takes 45-70's it is a 45-70, even though it will chamber shorter rounds.

I would venture to say the law is trying to target handgun cartridges in long arms.

Ololique · « **Reply #3 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:16:58 AM »

Fortunately, the law isn't written that way

And yes, they are trying to target handgun cartridges to be used in rifles. I'm trying to take advantage of a rifle I already have, plus a new category of legal cartridges. Sounds like the 45-70 "Short" fits the bill... I'll be posting more information on my project as it becomes available. It may be some time though. Further comments are still welcome!!

Ololique · « **Reply #4 on:** January 11, 2007, 11:01:37 AM »

Range Report...

45-70 case, trimmed to 1.625", loaded with 40gr of RL-7 + 300gr Rem HP, seated to crimp groove produced 1550fps out of the GG. More to come

Rev Buck · « **Reply #5 on:** January 11, 2007, 03:58:13 PM »

Sounds interesting, but please educate me...what is the difference between your 45/70 short and a good ol' 45 long Colt? The Marlin 1894 is already chambered for that one. Rev

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #6 on:** January 11, 2007, 05:21:24 PM »

The first thought that comes to mind is that your cases will stretch and soon exceed the maximum case length. I'd shorten it up plenty, maybe to 1.610".

The second thought is why bother? Get '94 in .44 or .45.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #7 on:** January 11, 2007, 05:26:49 PM »

Quote from: Ololique on January 11, 2007, 11:01:37 AM

Range Report... 45-70 case, trimmed to 1.625", loaded with 40gr of RL-7 + 300gr Rem HP, seated to crimp groove produced 1550fps out of the GG. More to come

Range report:

My Browning B92 in .44 Rem Mag drives a 300g Speer to 1531fps and a 240g to 1881fps. These loads will do anything your .45-70 Short will do, except foul the chamber ahead of the brass.

But hey, different strokes...

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #8 on:** January 12, 2007, 12:16:50 AM »

and a rossi 454 will probably outdo it. but what is the fun in that and the nice thing about yours is you can use it in a gun you allready have and if you hunt out of state and want the power you can go back to the 4570

Ololique · « **Reply #9 on:** January 12, 2007, 01:07:09 AM »

LLoyd's got it right!! There is no difference between this and an 1894 or a number of other rifles... Except the fact that I don't own anything else that will fit the bill. My quest??? To be able to use my 1895G. Only one hangup though... It's double feeding rounds out of the magazine.

Oh well. Project scrapped for now $:-\$ Although this is quite viable in a single shot, or fed one at a time.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 12, 2007, 01:37:36 AM »

The thing that would concern me is, if the Game warden caught you, you would have to prove your innocents.

I think it would be a reason for me to buy another gun.

ggeilman · « **Reply #11 on:** January 12, 2007, 03:43:16 AM »

And I was worried about accidently loading with the brass from leverulution rounds as they are short! I loaded 6 by mistake.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #12 on:** January 13, 2007, 03:19:02 PM »

Sounds to me like your trying to re-invent the 45-60 cartridge, personally I would stay with the 45-70 myself.

45-60 WIN, 45-70

Cottonwood · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2007, 11:40:55 AM »

Okay did some research on the 45-60 as the case measures 1.890" and Ololique trimmed his 45-70 case down to 1.625" which is shorter than the 45-60....

So what do we call this new 45 cartridge... in light of Indiana where he lives can someone agree that I think the new cartridge should be called the .458 Indiana ie 45-1.625" legal

Ololique can you post a pic of your catridge?

Ololique · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2007, 02:03:17 PM »

Here's a pic

Along side is a 45 Colt for comparison...

handirifle · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2007, 12:47:40 AM »

Quote from: The Montanan on January 16, 2007, 11:40:55 AM

Okay did some research on the 45-60 as the case measures 1.890" and Ololique trimmed his 45-70 case down to 1.625" which is shorter than the 45-60....

So what do we call this new 45 cartridge... in light of Indiana where he lives can someone agree that I think the new cartridge should be called the .458 Indiana ie 45-1.625" legal

Ololique can you post a pic of your catridge?

That's a good one!

Personally, I like the idea, but just make sure the law DOESN'T state "handgun cartridges" as you have created a new rifle cartridge instead. That thing is even longer then the 454 Casull. Lots of potential there.

Now if you can just overcome the double feeding issue!

handirifle · « **Reply #16 on:** January 17, 2007, 12:50:02 AM »

Quote from: Coyote Hunter on January 11, 2007, 05:26:49 PM

Quote from: Ololique on January 11, 2007, 11:01:37 AM
Range Report... 45-70 case, trimmed to 1.625", loaded with 40gr of RL-7 + 300gr Rem HP, seated to crimp groove produced 1550fps out of the GG. More to come

Range report:

My Browning B92 in .44 Rem Mag drives a 300g Speer to 1531fps and a 240g to 1881fps. These loads will do anything your .45-70 Short will do, except foul the chamber ahead of the brass.

But hey, different strokes...

True but he's trying to do this without buying a new rifle. Some don't have an extra $500 laying around.

handirifle · « **Reply #17 on:** January 17, 2007, 12:55:31 AM »

Looking closer, when you factor in the extra case volume available in the 458 Indiana

, it could exceed the 454 and blow the doors off the 44 mag. It would take some real life pressure testing equipment to be safe, but if he loaded that larger case to 44 mag pressures?? Who knows? Not sure what the 454 pressures are but might be more than the Marlin frame can handle.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #18 on:** January 17, 2007, 02:00:05 AM »

The ONLY case length that this new .458 Indiana comes close to is the .445 Super Mag, which as you see is 1.610" in length... dang just a hair shorter than the 1.625" that Indiana gives for max length of cartridge case. In which case after firing your .458 Indiana rounds, you must check for case stretching and if so trim to legal length.

BTW, I also see the guys with H&R Handi-Rifles jumping all over this one as well, as a got to have, just because cartridge.

blackwolfe · « **Reply #19 on:** January 18, 2007, 04:58:10 PM »

Instead of .458 indiana, I sugest .458 Hoosier Magnum. Now can I get a Freedom Arms chambered for it?

Cottonwood · « **Reply #20 on:** January 19, 2007, 01:33:31 AM »

Quote from: blackwolfe on January 18, 2007, 04:58:10 PM

Instead of .458 indiana, I sugest .458 Hoosier Magnum. Now can I get a Freedom Arms chambered for it?

Now I'm sure FA will chamber anything you want.... money has a way of getting any manufacture to produce. But now, with the .454 Casual, .460 or the .480 Ruger, 475 Linebaugh, or the 500 Magnum.

But wait a minute, FA does already have a 45-70, which BTW can be had for $756.39 http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php/cPath/21_38

Now you can shoot both cartridge in this hand-cannon

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 20, 2007, 03:24:40 AM »

Quote from: The Montanan on January 19, 2007, 01:33:31 AM

Quote from: blackwolfe on January 18, 2007, 04:58:10 PM
Instead of .458 indiana, I sugest .458 Hoosier Magnum. Now can I get a Freedom Arms chambered for it?

Now I'm sure FA will chamber anything you want.... money has a way of getting any manufacture to produce. But now, with the .454 Casual, .460 or the .480 Ruger, 475 Linebaugh, or the 500 Magnum.

But wait a minute, FA does already have a 45-70, which BTW can be had for $756.39 http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php/cPath/21_38

Now you can shoot both cartridge in this hand-cannon

Sorry to bust your bubble but that is a Magnum Research BFR 45-70 a not a Freedom Arms.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #22 on:** January 20, 2007, 04:20:45 AM »

Dang Redhawk1 my bad there.....

your right. BUT the Magnum Research BFR 45-70 would work though.

ggeilman · « **Reply #23 on:** January 20, 2007, 08:09:13 AM »

Yeah I have seen that hand cannon from Magnum Research! No other way to describe it. Not sure what I would ever do with it or if I have the strength to handle it.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #24 on:** January 21, 2007, 01:25:05 AM »

I don't want to seem to hi-jack the thread, but just showing this..... the 45-70 short or .458 Indiana would be a walk in the park compared to the .454 Casual or the .500 S&W Magnum as shown here with a .500 Magnum being used.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 21, 2007, 01:40:36 AM »

The Montanan, I have a BFR 500 Mag from Magnum Research. It is a lot of fun to shoot. I have also shot the 45-70 in a BFR and it was not bad at all.

Cottonwood · « **Reply #26 on:** January 21, 2007, 03:20:23 AM »

Quote from: Redhawk1 on January 21, 2007, 01:40:36 AM

The Montanan, I have a BFR 500 Mag from Magnum Research. It is a lot of fun to shoot. I have also shot the 45-70 in a BFR and it was not bad at all.

I think I remember you talking about them before... dang I think you even posted pics of both of them one above the other too.... But the guy in the pic is shooting I believe a 4" S&W in 500 Magnum.. THAT is alot of power there.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 21, 2007, 03:38:52 AM »

I have a 4 inch 500 Mag also, I am getting a comp made for it, that actually eliminates the comp and make it an end cap. I am tired of the excess noise and flash of the comp. I did a little research and found I can make a 460 Mag end cap work in the 500 Mag, with a little machine work.
Sorry to Hijack this thread. I will cut it out.