- August 17, 2017 at 6:55 pm #46612
See post #18. Maybe I’ll get banned too. That site is so full of snobbery.
- August 18, 2017 at 7:08 am #46616
That site is full of snobbery. No question. However, unless the moderators deleted some posts, I agree with everything that was said.
In my extensive testing of the 45-70 (albiet with leverguns) a lead bullet is only capable of producing 1.5 MOA. Yeah, some folks might walk the rice paper and get a ten shot group occasionally that is phenomenal (hell I got one group that was .8 with a levergun!!!) but if you shoot three ten shot groups, there are very few people on the planet that can claim all three were less than 1.5MOA. Im one of those who can’t because I don’t shoot BP.
Assuming you are a jedi knight judging the wind so it does nothing to effect your MOA, @ 1000 yards, you’re looking at a 16″ pattern, which is……..iffy at best.
Couple that with a 4 second bullet flight (take the shot, sip your tea, look at your watch, check the spotting scope for the bullet impact………)
Just saying, if somebody pulled that off, they’d be hailed a hero.
- August 18, 2017 at 7:22 am #46617kensParticipant
- Posts: 56
- Comments: 531
- Overall: 587
I thought the gist of that was the original post saying how surprised he was that 200yd zero also fell on the 1000yd zero.
Then it all went south from there.
I have not shot any long range 45-70, so somebody tell me if you got a 200yd zero, and if 45-70 has a rainbow trajectory, then is the other end of the rainbow 1000yds,??
- August 18, 2017 at 11:32 am #46622
What was interesting was my sight setting for 1,000 yards is only 1.4″ above my 200 yard zero. I’d expected to use my 3″ sight staff.
Kens, hes not saying that at all. He was saying that he moved his aperture only 2.5″ up his vernier staff in order to achieve a 1000 yard zero. He thought he would have to switch to his 3″ sight staff.
There’s no way you could have a 200 yard zero that was equal to the 1000 yard zero unless your sights were 3 feet above your barrel.
- August 18, 2017 at 3:09 pm #46629Larry GibsonParticipant
- Posts: 55
- Comments: 507
- Overall: 562
- August 18, 2017 at 3:45 pm #46633
“Test”? Is this like dipping a toe in the water before diving in? Don’t hold back now.
My main issue was the negative comments on the guy who just mentioned he would like to hunt deer with his .45-70. I don’t believe he had any intention of trying to shoot a deer with his .45-70 at 1,000 yards.
- August 18, 2017 at 4:27 pm #46635
here’s the quote:
With the change in Iowa gun season allowable firearms I was thinking about trying to shoot a deer at 1000yards with my 45-70. I was going to use a 405 Lyman over 67 grains of FF Goex. I know 62 grains of FF under a 500 postel style will work but I want a flat nose. I am surprised at the small sight change. Good shooting.
He clearly states an intention to “shoot a deer at 1000 yards with a 45-70”. That’s unethical at best, and I think dude has been watching Quigley Down Under too much. I’m not down on anybody here, but it’s the same as saying you’re going to compete at Perry with a Remington 770. Nobody likes to be told what their limitations are, but the facts are the facts. You have to be able to hit a paper plate with every shot with whatever rifle you are shooting with, and Id bet my lunch the guy couldn’t touch a paper plate at 1000 yards if you let him bang away to his hearts content for 6 hours, let alone hit it with the first shot. The cartridge itself cannot do it reliably (it really doesn’t matter if it’s a Sharps or a 30lb bench rifle with fancy optics) and the men who can predict a 4 second bullet flight are few and far between. Very Very rare. I wouldn’t put it past Larry Gibson if you gave him ten shots, but I can’t think of a single other person who’s got the right kind of trigger time.
Who knows. Maybe I’m wrong?
- August 19, 2017 at 9:24 pm #46654
I admit to originally reading the post incorrectly. I just thought he just wanted to shoot a deer with his .45-70. But, now … 1,000 yards? I hope none are wounded, or the farmer over the next hill too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.