I put my big heavy 45-70 against LeverRevolutions today ...

[86er]

I had the rare ocassion to use a 300 yards range today. The range was closed to the public so I had the run of the place with my friend. We put targets on big orange plastic highway construction barrels so we could easily move the range. The ranges were verified with my Leica rangefinder. He bet lunch that his 325gr LeverRevolution shot flatter than my pet load, a 405gr Kodiak bullet running a hair over 2000 fps from my gun. We both used scopes, mine an 1886 and his a Marlin 1895. I won lunch. Here's why - We followed Hornady's sight in recommendation of 3" high at 100 yards. We then shot 50, 75,100, 150, 175, 200 and 300 yards with each load in each gun 3 shot group per range. This was what we got:

Sorry - you have to line up my columns

Hornady LeverRevolution
Yards Inches
50 2.5
75 3
100 3
150 0
175 -2.5
200 -4
300 -29
405gr Kodiak at 2000fps handload
50 2
75 3
100 3
150 2
175 0
200 -2
300 -19

This has been said and discussed before but it was nice to see first hand. As you can tell from my chart, there is a concernable difference at 200 yards (if shooting small animals) and a big difference at 300 yards.

I don't load these myself, but the handloads cost just about as much as the factory Hornady ammo, so no real difference in price - just performance!

[Old Savage]

Very interesting, according to my calculator with the 405 loads you have about 1000 lbs more energy 3500+ vs 2500+ and about 60% more recoil approx. 41 ft lbs vs 25 ft lbs.

I got 1803 to 1869 fps with my 1895 with Leverevolution.

Have to thank you and your friend for doing this - I no range to do it myself.

[Old Savage]

That is actually flatter for the Leverevolution than Hornady says - they have - +3" at 100 yds. and -6.6 at 200 on my box.

[AJMD429]

Do you think that's because the pointy tip just still can't make that big fat bullet 'streamlined' enough to retain velocity well? (I don't know the ballistic coefficients involved.)

I always figured with a large diameter bullet, unless you care to make it v-e-r-y long (way beyond the 'Hornady' profile), your ballistic coefficient isn't going to be all that much better.

I'll bet if you shaped a projectile like a 180gr BT 'match' .308 bullet, in .45 caliber it WOULD out-do the can-shaped 405gr, but the Hornady .45 caliber bullets seem more shaped like an oil can with a funnel on top.

Now, as a way to get a .308 into a tube-magazine gun (if one really HAS to do that), since the .308 can actually be a flatter shooting round than some of the 'standard' tube magazine fare, maybe it makes sense.

Of course for that purpose, they have Browning BLR's and Savage 99's just waiting to be given a loving home...

[86er]

OS - I didn't even notice if the Hornady box had a trajectory scale on it - but I would have thought the factory claim would be better since I think they base it on the 24" barrel new Marlin. We used a 22" Marlin and 22" Winchester.

AJMD429 I don't know why it is, it just is.

We also shot 50 AK Marlin 18.5" barrel. I found it remarkable that the 400, 450 and 500grain bullets all had the same trajectory out to 100 yards. We didn't shoot it past 100 - too many rounds bang-whomp on my shoulder.

[Old Savage]

That is about where the Speer loading manual would have it trajectory wise. No real surprises here from published numbers. And give the 400 gr slug 150+ in fps and you are right there. If you put a 300 out at the Leverevolution velocity it drops approx. 8" at 200. But a friend who shot 400s at almost 1900 out of his 86 could hold on the top of 12" 200 yd plates and hit them consistently with irons.

When I saw that I thought the 444s flatter trajectory was not really practically relevant for hunting animals of any size out to 200 yds. Although it will work fine. The punch that 86er has it can't match.

[Old Savage]

In our dry air at 3000 ft everything shoots a little flatter than advertised.

[Mike D.]

That is a very telling chart, 86er. I would like to see what my 2200+ FPS loads with the Hornady 350RN would do at long range. I have killed deer at over 200 yds with the puny 300 Barnes Original, so the 350 should be more effective. My plan is to take a fat Colorado cow elk with the RN load later this year.

[El Chivo]

Isn't the Hornady Leverevolution loaded fairly light like most factory 45-70, because of the possibility of it being used in an old gun?

Some charts I've seen have put the max pressure for 45-70 at 25,000 cup.

If you used both bullets in the identical handload, that's how to test for the pointy tip.

[gregg]

Which one shot the smallest groups? My money on the 405gr bullet.

[shawn_c992001]

I'd really like to see the Evolution bullets become available for reloading. Factory ammo for the 45-70 is ALWAYS going to be tame no matter what. Hopefully, Hornady will put some load data in the next reloading manual they put out just for the stronger 1895 actions and the ultra strong Ruger #1.

[86er]

The groups were almost identical, but since we shot Hornady first so there was added human error from fatigue. The heavier stuff did shoot better at 200 and 300 yards.

[Nath]

So in the real world where upon a 200yrd shot on game of which is pretty long IMO there is nowt in it!
Thank for sharing and thanks for the expense too, Nath.

[Leverluver]

I'd really like to see the Evolution bullets become available for reloading. Factory ammo for the 45-70 is ALWAYS going to be tame no matter what. Hopefully, Hornady will put some load data in the next reloading manual they put out just for the stronger 1895 actions and the ultra strong Ruger #1.

I've pulled, reloaded, and tested them to top velocities. It is a pretty decent bullet for what it was intended for (deer) at the current factory velocities. Performance degrades as velocity is increased. There was no problem reaching 2300fps at less than Buffalo Bore pressures. I have no doubt that it will go well beyond 2400fps from a #1. At that speed and at point blank range, it is a big varmint bullet, although if the shortest shots are kept past 100+ yds, hot-rodding it could extend the usable range.

Ever wonder why they don't quote the BC? It's because it isn't all that high to begin with. They don't tell you because they want to just let the "plastic hype" cause the intended "sugar-plums dancing in your heads". I calculated (using their retained velocity numbers) the BC at .230. I see where Chuckhawks also came up with the same number. Plastic does not make all BCs start with a 5. Are the sugar plums melting?

[shawn_c992001]

Hmmm a 45-70 varmint bullet, and favorite levergun!?! Coyotes and ground hogs LOOK OUT!!!! Papa's got a brand new bag!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!