45-70 or 40-65 and why?

[Trigger1212]

Evening Gents,

Well it looks like the 1877 orders are starting to move so I need to make a couple decisions and looking for a bit of input. The #1 question to be answered is: what caliber?

A couple of things to state first:
1. Long time experienced shooter, caster and reloader but relatively new to BP and have yet to shoot my first BPCR silly-wette match.
2. Currently have a vary nice RB in 45-70.
3. Have everything I need to start loading 45-70 right now including molds.
4. Looking at a caliber that will handle match duties AND hunting duties.
5. Not looking for anything longer than 45-70 as that will do anything I see this rifle doing.
6. I'm in my early 50s in good health (knock on wood) and active so not an issue of not being able to handle a 45-70s recoil.
7. I'm currently a grease-groove guy, but with some exposure I MIGHT be persuaded to try patching. My main negative on patching, with my admittedly limited experience, is in the hunting field. Gets wet out there in the woods! This year opening day whitetail hunting in northern lower Michigan was my wettest ever, really miserable. BUT, my brother got our groups best buck ever (over 40 year period), a real beauty. Would have hated to have a buck like that stroll out and have an issue with wet paper patched ammo...

I had pretty much been set on the 45-70, have no experience with the 40-65 other than what I've read here over the last few years. Got to thinking about it one day and listed out in my mind some of the potential advantages to the 40-65 and the main ones that come to mind are:

A.) Less powder and Lead so lower reloading costs.
B.) Lower recoil (I think!) which is always a good thing, while in good shape I'm not a machoistic guy that looooooves lots of recoil, favorite rifle is a 22LR! And as I get older I won't be a stud forever! .
C.) Slightly heavier rifle with smaller diameter hole in the barrel, weight = less perceived recoil. Should be a pussycat to shoot.

Then I got to thinking about the negatives:

A.) Need brass, if starline makes it I'll get that, I like properly headstamped brass, silly I know but there it is.
B.) No moulds so will have to pick up a couple to play with.
C.) No dies either, another expense.
D.) Possibility of giving up performance at long range vs 45-70? Don't know!
E.) You can get 45-70 ammo ANYWHERE in a pinch (hunting), never, EVER have I seen 40-65 on the shelf...
E.) Lower terminal effectiveness in hunting situation vs. a 45 cal.?
F.) Slightly heavier rifle with smaller diameter hole in barrel, might be an issue for making weight if I choose longer than a 30" barrel...

So, in the face of the above the logical choice should be go with the 45-70, at least from an economic standpoint. But if we were looking at things from an economic standpoint I wouldn't be getting this rifle or getting into BPCR!

What say you all? Those with 40-65s that love them and those that may have tried them and switched back to what ever round. Keep in mind the hunting angle also as I will look at this as a dual purpose rifle.

Lastly, for those of you that say "well you already have a 45-70 so get the 40-65 and you will have both", the main hang-up is that I would like to do it all with one rifle. I like having a favorite that does it all. Don't always work out that way but I like it when it does!

Thanks for the input Gents, let the opinions flow!

Cheers!

Wade

[bruce m]

wade,
could it be considered that the 77 deserves a traditional cartridge?
the 45/70 would be such.
in 40 cal, the 40/2.5 chamber was a proven mid range performer in the day.
it will do anything the 40/65 win can do and more.
the 40/65 win was a cartridge for repeaters and not used by sharps.
the 40/2.5 was also known as the 40/65 in the day.
some say they have trouble getting the sharps cartridge to shoot as easily as the winchester one, but in its day the 2.5" case was known and accepted as a seriously accurate number.
one wonders why some modern shooters cannot achieve the same.
my own 40/72 has a case about 1/10" longer than the sharps case and shoots extremely well, so the 2.5 case should present no problem to one who is prepared to experiment.
recoil will be less than the 45.
keep safe,
bruce.

[desert deuce]

Tell you what Wade, you have absolutely come to the right place to receive the information you need to make the right decision. But, before other less helpful posters on this site chime in I will set you on the right course.

You see, and from your post you already know this, you did not have a conundrum until your put your name on the list to receive a model 77 and your turn came up. Reflect back and I am sure you will realize that it was in a weakened impulsive moment that you had not thought through as thoroughly as you now are in retrospect.

So, to save you from making a mistake that you may regret for a long time should you proceed let me point out something you may not have considered.

AND, since I am a big game hunter myself I understand quite well what you could subject a rifle to in that part of Michigan. So, take a look at the photographs that the Wallingers posted of their 45-100 model 77's and tell me seriously that you would take such a work of art out in the rain and snow deer hunting? Of course you wouldn't !
You would create a safe space and method of storing, transporting and using such a fine rifle.

Now, what is it you would do with this 77 that you could not or would not do with your 45-70 ? Nothing !

You see, you made a mistake in ordering the 77 in the first place. So, man up, admit it, and sign over your place in line to me, I will have the rifle built with a round barrel, 27" in length, as close to 12 pounds as Kirk can make it without going over, have it checkered, chambered in 40-65 and be happy as a clam going from silhouette match to silhouette match lovingly discharging 400 grain bullets at steel all day long.

I can be reached by PM.

And as for Bruce, once he relapses into the 19th Century I am not so sure he is reasonably objective.

[bruce m]

zack,
apart from no antibiotics and things like that, the 19th century was not such a bad place.
keep safe,
bruce.

[Trigger1212]

Aaah, it's started, nice!

Bruce, always enjoy your posts to be sure, DD nailed you as to your 19th century outlook! Not a bad place to be for sure.

DD, appreciate the offer to take this burden off my shoulders, was just telling my wife how this forum is full of really special people, yep, really special people... The one point you made that is completely, 100% bass-ackwards and flat out wrong, it that I would have a problem taking this fine piece of hardware out into what ever weather the big game fields have to offer on the day of my outing. I dearly looooove fine rifles, and especially fine looking rifles but that cuts them no slack with me. I do not own a safe queen nor do any of them get a "lite duty chit". It could be raining cats and dogs, snow/sleet or just plain hot as hell, dusty and dirty and it will be going out there with me. Now they will get extra special love and attention once their duty is done, but they will be out there doing their duty, just like me. So appreciate the offer but I think I'll keep my place in line. Not too sure when that will be and If I call to ask they are not too forthcoming as to dates and that's just fine. When the time comes the time comes. I THINK I'm somewhere around 200 on the list, I believe I placed my order in February a couple months after the list opened.

Now, not letting you off that easy, why the vote for the 40-65, serious answer please!

Cheers!

Wade

[Trigger1212]

Bruce,

They did not have Bench Source Annealing machines in the 19th century, just sayin'!

W

[Don McDowell]

Do a 40, pick one any one. Reason being, you stated you already have a 45-70 of another manufacture. That will almost require an entire set of cases of either different brand or marked, the chance of the two rifles chambers being close enough for the fired brass to interchange, is pretty slim.
Any of the 40's are fully capable of hunting, and target shooting.
If you're thinking of something to shoot long range,, then go with a 45 2.4 chamber, and it might give better assurance against the kevlar coated critters that haunt the field and fauna.
Guess I need to call the office and see what the eta on my 77 in 40-70 might be hopefully getting the pay up or die letter in a month or so, if to long I got a real bad itch for a #1 with 32 inch standard weight barrel in 44-77, but must keep the budget in balance..

[desert deuce]

Dadgummit Wade, you are walking by a Golden Opportunity. Additionally, when I call Kirks attention to your intentions of abusing one his lovely children your name could either float way on down the list or even miraculously disappear.

You ask why 40-65 but trotted right by 27 inch barrel.

I am so fortunate to not only have one or two or more rifles, I shoot frequently with some of the most proficient riflemen that diddle around with this sport so I get to see different results in competition. One of my past associates used a 40-65 quite successfully on elk. I have made the rounds, 44-70, 45-70 45-90, 44-100, 40-65 and so on. I normally don't admit to 40-70 SBN or 40-70 SS but Donnie Ray, brave soul that he is, diddles with that cartridge at times. The best scores in target contemporaneously are shot with a 40-65. Matches in Silhouette are won frequently with a 40-65 and in both target and silhouette are with off the shelf bullet moulds.

Moreover, in silhouette there is that little jumping critter called chickens. They are shot offhand you know and of all the rifles I have fiddled with a heavy barreled 40-65 with a 27 inch barrel impresses me most on chickens and midrange paper targets cause you are only shooting out to 600 yards.

If you have any designs of shooting in NRA competition beyond 600 yards I highly recommend the 45-90.

However, the iron sights normally useful for target and silhouette are not well suited to hunting. Of course a scope can take up some slack there.

Of course the best advice was contained in my earlier post.

[bruce m]

since my last post i have had a tooth out.
to antibiotics i will now add anaesthetics to modern advantages.
benchsource annealers are now passe.
you have to own an induction annealer to have a chance.
keep safe,
bruce.

[DAVE ROELLE]

I have both calibers in Shiloh's and Rollers
The 40-65 is the caliber I pick up first now

Plenty of power for hunting, easy recoil makes a silhouette match a pleasure

Stay Safe

Dave

[jackrabbit]

If you want to do it all with one rifle, get the 45-70. Personally, if I am going to overhaul an engine, I want a toolbox full of tools. I could do it with a pair of pliers, but it wouldn't be very good.

It's kind of like finding a wife, the search and pursuit is part of the fun!
good luck! Cody

[desert deuce]

Now Cody, that's not the way I heard it ? Of course I admit I wasn't there.

Seems the predominant opinion is that you chased her until she caught YOU ! But that may just be laymans musings.

However it happened, from here it looks like Heaven intervened on your behalf.

[gunlaker]

Cody if I picked wives like black powder rifles then I'd have an awful lot of wives

Chris.

[Kurt]

Get the .44-77 and you will have the best of both worlds

[Don McDowell]

Just problem is they won't build a 77 in 4477