45/90 Shooters?

[oldred]

In my searching of the net for info on the 45/90 I find many others asking the same questions I have about this excellent caliber but almost all also have the same problem- lots of questions on loads, etc but little info to be found. IMHO the 45/90 should have seen the revival that the 45/70 enjoyed (but then that's just my opinion), because it will do anything the 45/70 will do and in most cases even more. For BP shooting it has a definite edge because of the increased case capacity but this larger case also allows for slight velocity improvements over the 45/70 at comparable pressures even when using smokeless so what's not to like about it? So my question here is how many of you guys shoot this fine old round and what's your opinion of it for a single shot rifle?

[montana_charlie]

The 45/70 is known to be capable of accurate shooting at 1000 yards. But, to get that far, a fair number of shooters opt for short-butted bore riders or tapered driving bands in order to set the bullet out farther ... and get more powder under it.

For that reason alone, the 45/90 is a better choice. You can load a bullet with all of it's grease grooves covered to protect it from the elements, and STILL get 80 grains, or more, of powder under it.

So far, the heaviest charges I have used had 86 grains of Goex Cartridge, and a 550 grain bullet seated about .670" deep in the case.

CM

[DaveCampbell]

I've been a fan of the 45-90 for years after I traded for an original 1886 Winchester in that caliber. Yes, I know it's not exactly the same cartridge. Eventually I came across a Pedersoli Sharps is in the correct chambering. The more I shoot it, the better I like it. A couple of months ago I was at the Whittington Center with the Sharps and spent a morning hammering an iron bison at 1,123 yards on the Long Range Silhouette range. I was using a 405-grain boolit because that was all I had. I am now looking for the 535-grain Postell mold. I may use it this fall on a critter or two.

[XTR]

My load testing with my 45-70 has caused me to question the point of the longer 45-** cases. I've come to understand that you can't push cast bullets but so fast w/o some kind of modification to the bullet, either gas checks or paper patches.

So my question to the guys who shoot the longer cases, is the point to get heavier/longer/higher BC bullets up to the 1200FPS MV threshold or were they designed around paper patching to get bullets up to the higher velocities that I keep getting told are pointless?

[Don McDowell]

I'm with XTR if you're talking smokeless the 45-70 will do about anything that needs doing, and if thats not enough then maybe just jump right on into the 458 winchester or Lott.
The 2.4 inch case came about after the Springfield armory tried loading 90 grs of powder in the 2.1 inch case to make their trapdoors more competitive with the big 44's that were popular at the Creedmoor and other long range events. Then winchester looking for the almighty speed freak load took that same case, stuffed 90 grs of powder under a deep seated 300 gr bullet to get some express loadings for the 86. The cartridge then as now as with a whole slew of others just didn't respond well to smokeless powder and died..
For allround use with bp it might be pretty hard to beat the 2.4 case in a single shot action, but for smokeless it's not so much.

[oldred]

I agree that BP loadings is where the 2.4 excels but it's also true that it will improve upon the shorter cases even with smokeless powders. It's often stated that the 45/70 can be overloaded with smokeless so there's no point in the longer cases but that's not entirely true because the 2.4 will, depending on powder choice, yield as much as 200 FPS or so more velocity than the 45/70 when loaded to the same pressures due to the extra case capacity. I suppose it could also be correctly pointed out that the 458 will do anything the 2.4 will do and a heck of a lot more BUT look at what the 458s are chambered in. If I were shooting a heavy bolt action magnum type rifle I would of course prefer the awesome 458 but in a highwall or Sharps rifle I would much rather have the 45/90 (2.4) , I would also MUCH prefer the Highwall or Sharps to the bolt gun anyway. Just some thoughts and I fully realize that most of the pros/cons (actually very few "cons" for either round!) of the 45/90 vs the 45/70 will depend a great deal upon the shooter's preferences and what works for some may not be ideal for someone else, still I look forward to any and all comments on this wonderful old cartridge.

[Don McDowell]

You could always go with a ruger #1 in one of the 458's and call it your belted improoved borchardt... lol

[Kenny Wasserburger]

XTR,

Most of the guys using the longer 45 cases, in competition are getting around 1350 to 1450 fps with their loads, thats a standard 20-1 or some of us use 16-1 alloy GG bullets, I personally use 16-1 alloy. My GG load runs 1406 fps with a 525 gr bullet. My Paper Patch load of 540 grs runs around 1356 to 1365 depending on alt and humidity.

This PP load, this past year has resulted in some very good Master class scores and Placed well at, the Winter Nationals and the America's Cup Match, In May it Won the Scope class at Alliance Neb for the Long Range Portion of that Match.

The First day of the Winter Nationals, the Top 4 rifles in very windy conditions, 1st 45-100, 2nd 45-100, 3rd 45-100, 4th 45-110.

the Shooters,
1st John Venhaus
2nd Dave Gullo, No surpise there
3rd Bryan Youngberg
4th Kenny Wasserburger

Again it was very very windy tough conditions, the longer cases really shined.

KW
The Lunger

[XTR]

Interesting. Your MVs are about 200 FPS higher that what seems to be the accepted max for GG bullets at least what I've read here.

[MGySgt]

Whats a GG boolit?

[oldred]

Whats a GG boolit?

Grease Groove

[geargnasher]

GG= Grease Groove, as opposed to paper-jacketed 'slicks' with no grooves cast in the boolit.

The 45/90 is a very versatile and wonderful cartridge, especially if chambered in a heavy single-shot. The 45/70 is no slouch, either. I'm not going to debate merits, but will say that the 45/90 is, well, .300" longer and will hold more powder!

I shoot smokeless powder exclusively nowdays in mine, and it STILL offers an advantage even with loads that wouldn't fill up a 2.1 case completely. The larger volume allows for lower pressures for the same velocity, so ultimately the velocity can be bumped a good deal without undue recoil or pressure increases. I like being able to shoot the same long ranges as with a 2.1 without quite as much recoil.

The 45/90 has a few more options than the 2.1, so that's the reason to own one if one has a choice.

Gear

[MGySgt]

Thank you OldRed and Gear. I have 2 45/90's and like them both very much. Thought I might have been using the wrong boolit in them. :)

I shoot smokeless - and feel the same way Gear does - I can get a slightly higher velocity with less recoil in the 45/90 than I can in my 45/70's.

[oldred]

I shoot either H4895 or Varget (when I shoot smokeless) pushing a 500 grain Lee roundnose in my Highwall with really good results, any other suggestions on smokeless powder choice with the 500 grain Lee rn?

Not too long ago at all I made the statement that while I really like shooting real BP in my muzzle loaders I had no interest in using it in my cartridge guns, then a while back curiosity got the best of me and I loaded up a few rounds with FFG behind that 500 grain Lee slug. I have not been the same since! :mrgreen:

[XTR]

I buy Varget by the 8lb jug, usually 2 or 3 at a time to reload for my F-TR rifle. I tried it in my 45-70 and for 405 and 350 class bullets found it to be too slow, lots of unburned powder in the barrel, but I can see where it would work well behind heavier bullets long flat pressure curve and a bit longer burn time to burn more of it.

[Kenny Wasserburger]

XTR, you got to be kidding me right? 1200 Fps max?

My loads are with Black powder and make 1356 fps with ease and some are well over 1400 Fps with a GG bullet.

BP works great in the big cases, it was what they were designed for to begin with.

KW
The Lunger.

[geargnasher]

1800 fps (chronographed) is fairly easy to achieve with paper-patched, grease-groove boolits in the 500-grain range if you size them to .002" over bore and patch for a snug fit in a fired case. The trick is seat them to engrave the patch when loaded (heavy thumb pressure to fully chamber in a falling-block action), and think outside the box with smokeless powder. Surplus cannon powder and a kicker charge of Reloader 7 and some good compression with inert filler helps a bunch. I use clip-on wheel weight metal or 20:1 when doing this, and the boolit nose designs seem to matter much less than when shooting patched pure lead with black powder.

I don't have a lot of exprerience with BP, but enough to know that all that is said about specific boolit weights and nose profiles for specific ranges is spot-on. With harder boolits, patched or not, and smokeless powder just about any boolit shape will do as long as it fits the gun and you find the right powder with which to launch it.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_89094e2b37df9f01b.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1549)

Gear

[Kenny Wasserburger]

You know,

I am sorry, this is a smokless forum.

My bad.

Tried to help.

Wont make that mistake again.
KW
The Lunger

[geargnasher]

You know,

I am sorry, this is a smokless forum.

My bad.

Tried to help.

Wont make that mistake again.
KW
The Lunger

What's that supposed to mean? Nobody's badmouthing BP here, unlike all the grief the smokeless guys get from some of the "purists" here.

What I meant with "think outside the box with smokeless powder" was don't just limit yourself to conventional XMP5744 or Reloder 7 loads like the manuals want to stick with. Think SLOW powder for a long, low-pressure burn, and a kicker charge for cleanliness and ignition consistency in the straight-walled cartridges with large expansion ratios.

The OP was pretty general, and indeed the 2.4 has a real advantage over the 2.1 especially with black powder, I'm glad a few people brought that up to round-out the discussion.

Gear

[EDG]

What size 100 yard groups does this translate to?


XTR,

Most of the guys using the longer 45 cases, in competition are getting around 1350 to 1450 fps with their loads, thats a standard 20-1 or some of us use 16-1 alloy GG bullets, I personally use 16-1 alloy. My GG load runs 1406 fps with a 525 gr bullet. My Paper Patch load of 540 grs runs around 1356 to 1365 depending on alt and humidity.

This PP load, this past year has resulted in some very good Master class scores and Placed well at, the Winter Nationals and the America's Cup Match, In May it Won the Scope class at Alliance Neb for the Long Range Portion of that Match.

The First day of the Winter Nationals, the Top 4 rifles in very windy conditions, 1st 45-100, 2nd 45-100, 3rd 45-100, 4th 45-110.

the Shooters,
1st John Venhaus
2nd Dave Gullo, No surpise there
3rd Bryan Youngberg
4th Kenny Wasserburger

Again it was very very windy tough conditions, the longer cases really shined.

KW
The Lunger

[XTR]

XTR, you got to be kidding me right? 1200 Fps max?

My loads are with Black powder and make 1356 fps with ease and some are well over 1400 Fps with a GG bullet.

BP works great in the big cases, it was what they were designed for to begin with.

KW
The Lunger.

I was actually fishing with that one, and I'm being a little sarcastic here.

I joined this forum last yr after I got a Win-Mir 1885. Take a look at my posts. I've been on a quest to get accuracy from cast bullets at higher velocities. Every time I've asked the question, I've been told that I should drop my velocity back to what they shot in 1874 and quit my futile quest.

I'm glad to know that there are actually people out there getting good accuracy at higher MVs. Oh as for the Smokeless/BP thing. I don't care what makes your cork pop.

[oldred]

Fellows this was not supposed to be a smokeless vs BP thread, 45/90 vs 45/70 or anything vs anything else for that matter. I was simply curious as to how popular this round is and what type loads (of all kinds) that people are shooting. BP works great in the 2.4 and it's a lot of fun but smokeless works great also and it too is a lot of fun to shoot, I shoot both types of powders depending on the situation and I find the 2.4 works just as well with smokeless or BP as does the 45/70.

For smokeless loads I like the H4895 and Varget powders I mentioned earlier because of the good case fill and low pressures but these are the only smokeless powders I have tried with the 500 grain bullet. I did shoot some Blackhorn 209, which is IMO a bulky smokeless instead of the BP sub it is sold for, and while it worked really good it was just too darned expensive for no real advantage.

[.22-10-45]

Hello, everyone..I came across something interesting..It seems when the Sharps company came out with the .45 2.6 (.45-100)..the extra case length was intended for a grease "cookie". The Creedmoor match shooters soon learned to wipe after every shot..and as a result..the xtra length wasn't needed..Sharps brought out a shorter case...2.4" (.45-90) as a result of this. I wonder if the hunters..who seldom had the luxery of wiping, still prefered the 2.6 case using the grease wad?

[geargnasher]

I thought Winchester came out with the 45/90, or is that different from the Sharps 2.4? There were so many variants I can't remember what's what.

Gear

[oldred]

Sharps never loaded a "45/90" but the 2.4 Sharps and the 45/90 are the same cases, Winchester came out with the 45/90 which uses the 2.4 case and a lighter 300 grain bullet for what they called an Express load. That's interesting about the reason for the 2.6 case, it seems I recall hearing that once before and it makes sense because Sharps already had the 45/110 for a heavier alternative to the 45/70. I think the Sharps 2 7/8" (45/110) was available first in 1876 with the 2.6 (45/100) becoming available later that same year with the 2.4 (45/90) being introduced the following year. As for using smokeless in the 45/90 it was from very early on factory loaded with smokeless when smokeless rounds started to appear, according to "Cartridges of the world" the 45/90 was factory loaded with smokeless powder from 1895 until it was discontinued in 1936. Back many years ago I got my first center fire rifle when I inherited an 1886 Winchester in 45/90 along with a few boxes of (smokeless) ammo, best I can estimate from what I have learned since these rounds were from the thirty's, and being a kid (1965-66) not knowing at the time what I had I shot the cartridges and threw away the cases! [smilie=b: I have since passed on the Winchester to a nephew and I still see it occasionally but I would dearly love to have those original 45/90 cartridges I wasted back then.

[montana_charlie]

Interesting. Your MVs are about 200 FPS higher that what seems to be the accepted max for GG bullets at least what I've read here.
That depends on what you were reading and how you took it.

That 1200 fps 'limit' usually shows up in discussions which start off with a question about 'max loads', 'heavy loads', or 'Ruger No. 1 loads' in a .45 singleshot rifle.

Responders usually don't waste much time in telling the author that - no matter how strong the rifle may be - throwing a 500 grainer at the speed of light is going to weld his shoulder blades together.

THAT kind of conversation puts 1200 fps up as a reasonable 'maximum'.

CM

[Lead pot]

:grin::grin: why is it that a lot of shooters on these forums seem to think that driving a bullet at warp speed is the answer. The snail pace [smilie=2: the .45-70 travels has made the trip down range past the 1K target and it has hit it's point of aim for over 150 years and still going strong on long range matches :Fire::roll:

[oldred]

You have a very good point but in this case I don't think this thread is about max performance, of which I agree with you totally, rather it is about the 45/90, how many people shoot it and what loads are common. I certainly did not start this discussion looking for high performance loads nor even asking about specific data, I was just curious as to how much interest there is in the 45/90 round. Evidently even Sharps felt there was room for improvement on the venerable 45/70 way back in 1876 and some of us just enjoy shooting those old classic rounds even if they, as you correctly point out, are not necessary. Why do we want them? kind of hard to say really but my custom Highwall in 45/90 is soon going to be rechambered to 45/110 and will become a BP only rifle. Like you I could never understand the desire to "hot-rod" an old firearm but the subject comes up often, "What's the maximum load my Rolling Block, Ballard, old Winchester, etc will handle"? Why push these fine old classics? I know a fellow that shoots a Trap Door with loads that are scary (scary for a trapdoor anyway) and when he was warned about it the reply was "these are military rifles and they're built like a tank"! :groner: The smokeless powders chosen for my Highwall were selected with pressures in mind and the goal was to fill the case and still keep these pressures around 28,000 PSI or less, if I want to hotrod this caliber I will buy a 458 magnum.

[waksupi]

Why not just buy my .458 Win Mag, and be done with it? Then you can really beat yourself up.

[oldred]

Why not just buy my .458 Win Mag, and be done with it? Then you can really beat yourself up.


The key word there was "If" I wanted to hotrod that caliber! I have not owned a 458 but did get the chance to shoot one some years back, awesome rifle! The fact is that even if I had a need for one I could not stand the recoil these days, at 14 1/2 lbs my Highwall in the 45/90 chambering is really tame and I don't think the 45/110 will be much worse shooting BP.

[geargnasher]

My 13-1/2 lb 1874 beats the tar out of me with anything over midrange loads. I said you CAN to to 1800 fps with 500 grains (try THAT in a .45/70!), not that I did it often or enjoyed it. Sure shoots flat, though. The rifle and I both prefer around 1350-1400 fps with boolits in that weight and smokeless powder. I never was able to chronograph the BP loads I shot through it, too dang much smoke.

Gear

[Lead pot]

I have no intentions loading any of my 74 Sharps to 1800 fps even the calibers I load with 115 grains of black powder with. There is no need to do that.
My .45-70 shoots just fine at 1150 fps out to the 1000 yard irons with a 513 gr bullet
My .45-90 runs at about 1250 fps I load it at with a 535 gr bullet
The 44-90 BN is loaded at between 1320 to 1400 using a 400 to 505 grain bullet
The 50-90 1305 fps with a 720 gr bullet
The .40-70 with a 410 gr bullet close to 1280 fps.
What I'm getting at they all hit the 1000 yard iron with no problems.

Oldred
To answer your question. All of the calibers I listed plus some other calibers I have not, if it would come down to just one rifle one caliber it would be a tough choice between the .44-77 and the .45/2.4 for me.
I think the 2.4 is a great all around caliber loaded with a full case of black powder what it was designed for.

Kurt

[semtav]

The good thing about the 45-90, is that you can load it from 45-70 to 45-100 velocities with excellent accuracy. Course when you get to the 45-100 velocities on a hot day, your fouling control techniques have to keep up with the velocity.

[GARCIA]

I have two 1886 Winchesters in 45-90. One is an original and the other is a rechambered reproduction Winchester.

I use strictly gas checked bullets at 350 grain and at 400 grain.

I use strictly the load date for the Trapdoor in both of them. The top end load of Varget from the HODGDON web site will give me around 1550fps with the 400 grain bullet. Don't need more than that as far as I am concerned.

The Lyman 48th shows some pretty heavy load data for the 45-90. I have no desire to launch a 400gr bullet at almost 2200fps.

Varget has done me well and I am sticking with it as it fills my needs.

Tom

[25ring]

Geargnasher,I've been using WC872 with a small kicker of RL-7 and a Lyman postell in a 45-70.Getting around 1300 fps with excellent accuacy.I'm about to try to work up a load in the 45-90,keeping the velocity in the same range [1300-1350].I'll probably need to use either a longer,heavier bullet or a thicker wad or filler.Have you done any load developement in this area? I'd appreciate any input you would have.PS--Nice to see someone else thinking outside the box! Thanks,Mike.

[MGySgt]

Currently I use 3031 and a 430 grain GC with a dacron filler in my 45/90.

I went into quickload and checked with the Lyman 535 grain boolit.

I would start at about 36 grains, dacron filler for a MV of 1330 plus. 41 grains was about 1800 PSI but that was with a filler - soooooo

[geargnasher]

3031 never shot as well in mine as even straight Reloder 7 or 5744. Duplexing is where it's at with smokeless. Use inert, granular fillers to take up space.

Gear

[MGySgt]

Gear - I have MOA from 2 45/90's with a 430gr FP GC with 3031 and slightly compressed dacron filler.

I might try a duplex load but I would have to do awhole lot of reading up on it before I would try it. For some reason it just scares the poop out of me! :)

[geargnasher]

I was using heavier, plain-based boolits in mine with the 3031. Reloder 7 grouped quite a bit better through full load workups for both, and I did use lightly compressed Dacron. I think the gas check probably made a difference, not to mention weight and different guns, brass, reloading techniques, etc. It's amazing to me how no two of use could get the exact same load to work the same even if we tried! Too many little nuances of components and technique.

Gear

[oldred]

Geargnasher, I notice you mention Reloader 7 and that got my attention because I have been considering it recently so if you don't mind I would like to ask a couple of questions. Was that load with a 500 grain bullet? How was the case fill compared to the 3031? How clean does it burn? From comparing loads for the 45/90 from the Lyman manual (which are waaaay too hot IMHO! But that's another subject I would like to discuss some other time) it would seem that Rx 7 offers good performance similar to the H4895 and Varget I have been using but at even lower pressures in the 2.4 case.

[BAGTIC]

[QUOTE=geargnasher;1804567]GG= Grease Groove, as opposed to paper-jacketed 'slicks' with no grooves cast in the boolit.

If the velocity increases the recoil will increase unless the bullet weight or charge is also reduced.

[bigted]

i love burning blackpowder in my 45-70's and the 45-120 but have wondered if my 45-70 is the best way to go as i use a cookie as well to help control fouling ...but the 45-70 case is too short to load the loads i want and still have room for the cookie.......so i been thinking about runnin my 70 rifle out to the 2.4...45-90 or the 2.6 or 45-100 length for just this reason. my cookies are 1/4 inch and i use 3/8ths for the 120 case but there is plenty of room in that one to put any cookie and still have room for 110+ grains of powder...think thumper in a hunting weight rifle....and thats with blackpowder...YIPPI !!!

[nanuk]

.... Why do we want them? kind of hard to say really ....


I had bought a Cogswell and Harrison hammered double in 500BPE, just cause I WANTED something big, fat, long and with two barrels....

I have never felt necessary to come up with any other rationalization! :)

[oldred]

Exactly, to me it's for greed not need!!!! :grin:

[supe47]

OR......."Mr Need is gone and gotta have is here". That's what I told myself when I ordered my 1885 High Wall from C.Sharps. Have a Marlin in 45-70 and just wanted something.......else. Worked for me. Supe

P.S. The bad part of retirement is you have more free time to wait.......and wait, and wait. Have an order in to BT for his 224 dies, more waiting. At this rate I'm going to wait myself broke.

[geargnasher]

I agree Lyman's data is WAY too hot for comfortable shooting with Reloder 7. I settled on 40 grains and 3/4 grain or so of Dacron with the 500-grain Lyman boolit (nose and bands both sized to fit the rifle), and 38 grains with the 535-grain Lyman boolit with the same Dacron filler. Neither of these loads were particularly clean, but shot very well out to 400 yards.

Gear

[XTR]

Thread resurrection here. (not that old though)


I have a loads question for the 45-90 guys, shooting smokeless

I'm kicking the idea of either re-barreling to or getting a new to me big bore, and the 45-90 seems interesting, but if I have to fill the case with filler I'd think I'd be just as well off with a 45-70 chamber. (I've read through this thread a couple of times)

For someone who shoots smokeless is the longer case an advantage?

What loads work best w/o fillers? I'm assuming the 45-90 will be pushing heavies, though I'm just guessing, maybe it would work with 385-405s but it the feeling I get is that the long cases push 500+ pills, is that wrong?

[montana_charlie]

but if I have to fill the case with filler I'd think I'd be just as well off with a 45-70 chamber.
I shoot a 45/90, but not with smokeless. So I don't have any real world experience in that area ... much like you. But, based on what I have 'heard' over the years (and I have kept my 'ears' open for 45/90 smokeless data) i would agree with your evaluation.

The factories have run the 45/70 through the gamut of possibilities, and they have published reliable data for it ... 'reliable' being data that the lawyers will let them stand behind.

I have seen few who will even describe a 45/90 smokeless load, and none who were able to inspire any confidence in me.

As case capacity increases, the insanity index of using smokeless powder increases. The 90-grain case may be close enough to 45/70 to stay within reason, but I have chosen not to test it.

One thing I DO know for a fact.
It is possible to put a safe load of smokeless in a 45/70 cartridge that is extremely uncomfortable to shoot.
I can't imagine what benefit it would be to increase that sensation ...

CM

[oldred]

You hear it all the time, "you can easily stuff enough powder into a 45/70 case to overload it so there is NO advantage to the longer 45/90 case" but that's simply not true. With the longer case you can get about 200 to 300 FPS more velocity at the same pressures with the 45/90 vs 45/70 or you could get the same velocity as the 45/70 but with lower pressure, with the right powder/bullet combo the 45/90 makes an excellent smokeless round. I have been researching loads for this round for several months now and have found several good loads for both 400 and 500+ grain bullets but even 300-350 grain bullets can work also depending on the twist rate, 1-18 seems to work really well for the heavier bullets. As far as fillers needing to used they are not necessary nor even recommended by the powder manufactures however there may be some advantages to fillers in some situations, personally I prefer a full (or nearly so) case and there are several powders that will do just that in this cartridge. 5744 is a very popular powder for this round and does not need a filler even with quite a bit of air space in the case, it is not supposed to be position sensitive and even the 28 and 32 grain loads I shot worked out well. Right now I am working with a couple of other AA powders using data supplied by Accurate which give a better case fill than 5744 but apparently 5744 is the most popular powder for this round.

[oldred]

A bit of a historical note concerning using smokeless in the 45/90, To quote Cartridges of the world,

" the smokeless powder 45/90 came out in 1895 until it was discontinued in 1936"


So even the factories saw fit to use smokeless in this round almost from the time smokeless powder began to be used.

[Don McDowell]

Also need to keep in mind the factories saw fit to load the cartridge with a 280-300 gr bullet seated deep enough in the case to keep the 2.6 oal to cycle thru the 86 winchester.

[XTR]

As case capacity increases, the insanity index of using smokeless powder increases. The 90-grain case may be close enough to 45/70 to stay within reason, but I have chosen not to test it.

One thing I DO know for a fact.
It is possible to put a safe load of smokeless in a 45/70 cartridge that is extremely uncomfortable to shoot.
I can't imagine what benefit it would be to increase that sensation ...

CM

I get that. I've played with pushing jacketed 350s at over 2000FPS and that kind of recoil is just not something that I'm interested in dealing with unless I've got a legitimate need, like shooting at something that will get angry and come stomp me into a mucky mess if it doesn't die. If I ever get to the point that I go and hunt those critters I'll deal with that at that point in time, but today I'm looking for something a bit more sane.


I'd think that you could load long 500 class bullets deep in the case and still have room for plenty of powder.

oldred, I've never used 5744, how full was the case with your 28-30gr loads, what weight bullets and what MVs?

[oldred]

Also need to keep in mind the factories saw fit to load the cartridge with a 280-300 gr bullet seated deep enough in the case to keep the 2.6 oal to cycle thru the 86 winchester.

True but the fact remains that the factories loaded the 45/90 with smokeless for a lot longer than they did with BP and BP pressures are easily obtainable even with 500 grain bullets, still IMO smokeless should not be used in an original BP firearm just as it should not even in other calibers. Modern built replicas or newer designs using the much stronger newer steels however can utilize smokeless in the 45/90 just as easily as they can with the 45/70 at the same pressures, even at least one of the import replicas says smokeless in ok in their 45/90 cambering at 28,000 PSI or less. Unless a person just wants to shoot BP (not a bad idea at all!) there simply is no real reason to NEED to use BP in the 45/90 cartridge but the rifle it's chambered in may be a different matter so it depends entirely on what it is used in.

[oldred]

oldred, I've never used 5744, how full was the case with your 28-30gr loads, what weight bullets and what MVs?



There was air space in the case with these loads but there is also in a lot of modern smokeless rounds of various calibers even from the factories (ever pull apart a factory 45/70 round?), still probably the main reason I chose to look for another powder was I wanted a better case fill necessary or not. I was using both Varget and H4895 with the Lee 459-500-3R but a recent discussion here leads me to believe I was exceeding the self-imposed pressure limit of 28,000 PSI by about 10% which was still well within the proof test of my rifle, it was proofed in excess of 40,000 PSI, and would have been well within the allowable range of a modern built 1895 like the Winchesters and Brownings. I have been discussing this with the people at Accurate (very helpful people BTW :smile:) and this is the data they supplied that I have been working with lately,

This is data for use with the 500 grain Lee 459-500-3R seated to a COL of 3.070 and a maximum or 28,000 PSI.


Powder: Accurate -- 5744®.

Bullet weight: 500 grains.

Start load: 29.0 grains (1225 – 1265 Fps)

Maximum load: 32.5 grains (1350 – 1450 Fps).



Powder: Accurate -- 2015®.

Bullet weight: 500 grains.

Start load: 38.0 grains (1400 – 1500 Fps)

Maximum load: 43.0 grains (1550 – 1650 Fps).



Powder: Accurate -- 2495®.

Bullet weight: 500 grains.

Start load: 42.0 grains (1500 – 1600 Fps)

Maximum load: 46.0 grains (1650 – 1750 Fps).



Powder: Accurate -- 4064®.

Bullet weight: 500 grains.

Start load: 45.0 grains (1500 – 1600 Fps)

Maximum load: 50.0 grains (1650 – 1750 Fps).


45/90 load data sure is hard to come by but this cartridge seems to be becoming more popular all the time so all that may soon change.

[XTR]

I gotta imagine that a 500gr bullet at 1600 took a while to shake off.

I take it from your comments that those loads were giving good case fill with the 500s.

What's the make on your rifle? If I don't re-barrel my Win-Mir, which I know is a high pressure action, I'm looking at one of the Montana rifles in 45-90.

[oldred]

The 5744 leaves some space but the Varget and H4895 would almost touch the bullet base, they were quite accurate but recoil was heavy. While the 5744 gives BP like pressures and velocities the 50 grain Varget and H4895 loads using a 500 grain bullet may only be suitable for a modern rifle like the Winchester/Browning 1885s or something like a H&R or Encore chambered in this round. The Acurate 4064 50 grain load using this same bullet gives a good case fill and is supposed to yield no more than 28,000 PSI but I have only loaded a few rounds with this powder so far at the starting load and probably won't get a chance to try them before the weekend, I doubt I will even attempt that bone jarring max load! The 32 grain load of 5744 with the 500 grain Lee that I used a while back will get your attention but in my 14 1/2 lb rifle it was not bad at all nor would it be in most rifles, even the 50 grains of Varget using the same bullet would not have been all that bad except for the crescent butt plate. My rifle is a custom built High Wall with a heavy octagon barrel and it has been proof tested to Ruger no. 1 pressures but I still strictly stay at much lower pressures more in line with the import High Walls rather than the newer Winchester/Browning versions, the recoil would be unpleasant even if the rifle is safe at higher pressure.

[Texantothecore]

i love burning blackpowder in my 45-70's and the 45-120 but have wondered if my 45-70 is the best way to go as i use a cookie as well to help control fouling ...but the 45-70 case is too short to load the loads i want and still have room for the cookie.......so i been thinking about runnin my 70 rifle out to the 2.4...45-90 or the 2.6 or 45-100 length for just this reason. my cookies are 1/4 inch and i use 3/8ths for the 120 case but there is plenty of room in that one to put any cookie and still have room for 110+ grains of powder...think thumper in a hunting weight rifle....and thats with blackpowder...YIPPI !!!

I have been thinking the same thoughts. That way I would get a grease cookie and the full.45-70 load.

Good to know that I am not the only one working this issue.

[XTR]

What pressures will the Montana rifles stand up to in 45-90? I know that the the Win BPCR rifles clearly state that their 45-90 and longer are BP only. Do C. Sharps and Shiloh have the same limits?

I just looked in my 49th Lyman manual, They show 43gr of 5744 under the 500gr #457125 at 26600 CUP, or the same load under the 535 gr 457132 at 25400 CUP and both at 1600FPS+ that's probably gonna rock as hard as I'd be willing to stand behind on a regular basis.

[oldred]

That Lyman data is a real puzzle to me since it conflicts with most other data I have been able to find for this cartridge, for example compare their 5744 data with what the makers of 5744 recommend. The reason Winchester/Browning say BP only is that the 45/90 has no SAAMI specs, even Pedosoli (SP?) says the same thing but if you ask them they will tell you smokeless is OK as long as the 28,000 PSI pressure recommended for their rifles is adhered to. The New 1885s are chambered in some very high pressure rounds and reasonable smokeless loads for the 45/90 are safe in them, the 45/90 can be loaded to the same pressures as the 45/70 in these rifles and the 45/70 can be real thumper!

[MGySgt]

I just checked my copy of the 49th - they state 26,000 - I say BS.

I purchased Quick Load because of my 45/90.

[oldred]

I just checked my copy of the 49th - they state 26,000 - I say BS.

I purchased Quick Load because of my 45/90.




Not that I would consider shooting 43 grains of 5744 under a 500 grain bullet in my 45/90, I wouldn't even think of doing it, but I would be interested to know just how much pressure Quick Load would estimate that load to be with a COL of 3.07? I know what 32 grains will do in my rifle and while that load is probably safe enough, it gave me no reason to think otherwise, I just could not imagine dumping in another 11 grains of powder! I have been skeptical of that data from the first time I saw it!

[Don McDowell]

What pressures will the Montana rifles stand up to in 45-90? I know that the the Win BPCR rifles clearly state that their 45-90 and longer are BP only. Do C. Sharps and Shiloh have the same limits?

I just looked in my 49th Lyman manual, They show 43gr of 5744 under the 500gr #457125 at 26600 CUP, or the same load under the 535 gr 457132 at 25400 CUP and both at 1600FPS+ that's probably gonna rock as hard as I'd be willing to stand behind on a regular basis.

Can't say for sure about C Sharps, but Shiloh only warrants their guns for smokeless chambered in over the counter factory cartridges, 45-70,30-40 etc. Beyond that they don't recommend using smokeless.

[oldred]

Even pedersoli oks this round with smokeless, I would like to think that the Shiloh could handle anything one of those imports could and I am quite certain it can. Just like Winchester/Browning not recommending it is the prudent thing to do from a legal standpoint lacking the SAAMI specs on this particular round, lawyer thing I guess. A 45/90 would be little different than a 45/70 shooting the same bullet at the same pressures.

[Don McDowell]

With the absence of SAAMI pressure specs, and a severe lack of pressure tested smokeless data, no manufacturer that has a chance of loosing just about everything , on account of some idiot and a can of greendot and some 458 bullets all got together at a reloading press and then moved onto the range with his mild loads, ( you know everything should of been ok it is pistol powder and joe blow on the bent barrels forum said)....

[oldred]

The 45/90 is normally loaded as a low pressure round similar to the 45/70 and any action that is safe with the 45/70 would obviously be safe with the 90 loaded with the same bullet at the same pressures,The 45/90 has been loaded with smokeless powder for over 115 years by both handloaders and factory loads and is still loaded and shot an untold number of times everyday now using smokeless powders. Published data for this round is, and has been, around for a long time even if it's not as common as some of the more popular cartridges but it's there and has been for a long time and many, MANY, rounds have been fired using this data so it has stood the test of time. There's data out there from the powder manufacturers with some, like the Lyman data, being much hotter than others but the Lyman manual is a very popular publication and I am sure the data has been used a lot so it too has been tested by time. The bottom line is smokeless powder is perfectly safe in these cartridges and has been for over a hundred years and it was safe then and still is now!

[XTR]

oldred, I think you misunderstood Don's post. I read that to make the point that in the absence of published engineering and test data on the round manufacturers aren't willing to publish anything that their actions are safe. Another contributor is that the Montana guys are small and someone like Winchester and their owners are not up for testing a round that's such a very small production.

[oldred]

You're right so I tried to word that a little better, I guess I misunderstood the intent.

Just for the record I have been shooting the 45/90 for many years but there was a huge gap in that period, but still an old Winchester lever gun in 45/90 was my first centerfire rifle and the thing is still in my family. It might be of interest that back in 1968 when I inherited that Winchester I also got with it some factory ammo that I now realize had to have been loaded sometime from 1936 or earlier, this ammo was loaded with smokeless. Not knowing or even caring what I had I just shot those things and threw away the cases but I sure would like to have them now!

[MGySgt]

oldred - PM sent on the QL with 500 grain and 5744

Drew

[XTR]

Just to expand on this a little. When I resurrected this thread I sent questions to C Sharps and Shiloh asking about pressures for their 45-70s and 45-90s.

Shiloh says "45-70’s will take Ruger #1 loads, the 45-90 is blackpowder only."

C Sharps says "we recommend keeping pressures in the 28,000 to 30,000 range. "

I actually didn't expect the answer I got on the 45-70s from Shiloh, but the others are pretty much what I thought they'd be.

[Don McDowell]

oldred, I think you misunderstood Don's post. I read that to make the point that in the absence of published engineering and test data on the round manufacturers aren't willing to publish anything that their actions are safe. Another contributor is that the Montana guys are small and someone like Winchester and their owners are not up for testing a round that's such a very small production.

Bingo we have a winner:!:

There is pressure tested data in the Lyman 48th manual, and most likely in the 49th.
So that want to use smokeless in the cartridge certainly have a couple of good starting points.
BUT the fact remains that is a big case, actually the same as a 458 win mag. Lots of room for lots of powder that has no real business in a case that size,:groner:,, and the liability to any manufacturer is just to great to risk okaying the use of smokeless in their guns.:killingpc

[oldred]

Just as there is lots of room for the wrong powder in that big ol' 45/70 case to get a person in trouble! Poor loading practices obviously can get a person in trouble with most any case but of course that, as you correctly point out, becomes more of a concern as case capacity goes up. It's a classic example of "stick with published data and you will be OK" but venturing into the unknown is inviting disaster regardless of caliber.

Don when you mentioned someone with greendot from the bent barrel forum (got a good chuckle out of that) a case in point came to me, about 25 years ago a guy I knew had a trap door and some loading equipment but zero loading experience. He had also bought what he needed for the 38 special at the same time and the guy at the store where bought it suggested Bullseye powder but that was when he bought the 38 special stuff. Not having a manual he simply pulled apart a factory 405 grain round, don't know if it was WW or Rem, and measured the amount of powder that came out, he then loaded that amount of the Bullseye into his empty cases topped with some 400 grain Speer jacketed bullets! He had not yet fired any of the rounds (obviously!) in that old trapdoor when he showed them to me and a couple of other guys at a make-shift range we had set up for the weekend. When we tried to explain how dangerous that was he became defensive and insisted the guy at the store was an expert loader and he said Bullseye would be fine, we tried to again explain that maybe that was so but in what amounts? The guy insisted and just could not understand why one powder could be so different than another in the same amounts, he was insulted and took his rifle and left when we told him he would not be allowed to try his loads there because of the obvious (to us) danger. I later learned that what we told him did sink in enough for him to ask someone else who told him the same thing so he never shot those things. I have often wondered how many times that type of thing has gotten people hurt and the blame was placed on something else? Bullseye might be safe enough in the right amounts, or not I have no idea, but I for one would certainly not want to fire a round with that much of such a fast pistol powder under a bullet that heavy no matter what the case size! Just an example of what some people will do.

[Don McDowell]

Oldred, that's exactly the point. The 45-70 has saami pressure specs. So if someone takes one of those and thru stupid reloading practices turns a gun into shrapnel, the company will have some stiff legal fees, but won't stand much liability.
Scares the **** out of me when you read on these forums, "well you can use cast bullets and pistol powders, and not have to worry because the pressures are so much lower" Right there you Know that person has never looked at any pressure data, there are some combinations in several cartridges that go well past the peak pressures of many accepted jacketed bullet loads.
And just as scary is the ones that say, "well get a chronograph then you'll know how much pressure" WRONG that chrony only tellls you how fast the bullet went over the screens, it won't tell you you may have to have a hammer and punch to open the bolt, or that case will never solidly hold a primer again...

[oldred]

Just to expand on this a little. When I resurrected this thread I sent questions to C Sharps and Shiloh asking about pressures for their 45-70s and 45-90s.

Shiloh says "45-70’s will take Ruger #1 loads, the 45-90 is blackpowder only."

C Sharps says "we recommend keeping pressures in the 28,000 to 30,000 range. "

I actually didn't expect the answer I got on the 45-70s from Shiloh, but the others are pretty much what I thought they'd be.

This is the pressure range I have been talking about from the beginning and like I said in an earlier post the BP only is a "lawyer thing". They say the 45/70 is safe to Ruger no.1 pressures and as well built as those rifles are I have no doubt that's true but do they build the 45/90 version weaker? Common sense tells us they do not but since most published 45/90 data for smokeless powders is in the 28,000 to 30,000 PSI range or below and there is little to none (mostly none) in the 40,000+ range then what else could they say? Besides there simply is no need to load that heavy under those 500+ grain bullets anyway, if a person needs that kind of load then a 458 magnum or 458 Lott is a much better choice. Loading the 45/90 down to BP pressures using smokeless is easy and data is available, if a little more "thump" is wanted in the under 30,000 PSI range then published data is there for that also but if a person is looking to hot rod this fine old cartridge he will be pretty much on his own!


Again the advantages to the 45/90 vs the 45/70 is the '90 can achieve 200 to 300 FPS more velocity than the '70 at the same pressures or the same velocity at less pressure depending on the load.

[Pittsspecial]

I recently purchased the 45/90 1885 Winchester Highwall w/28" bbl. I hope to use my Lyman - Postell 535gr mold and the smokeless ACC-5744 powder. I am going to try BP down the road but for now I want to develop a good 500+yd load. Can you please provide a place to start?
BTW: I have some IMR 4064, H4895 as well Any information would be appreciated....