pressure signs in 1895 Marlin 45-70

[longshotz]

New to reloading the 45-70. Have loaded for 45 years everything from .270 to .375H&H; pistol stuff as well.
This is a beast of a different color.
I have seen lots of data and have loaded several dozen rounds, but I have yet to see the classic signs of pressure that are readily apparent with bottleneck cartridges.
I have loaded up to 2286 fps. with a 300 Sierra HP, 1772 with a 405 Rem. FN. Working up to these levels I could see no discernible difference in the pressure of either bullet/powder combination respectively.
For the record I have been using primarily IMR 4198 and RL 7. I have 3031 but as yet haven't tried it. Still looking for pressure signs that I am close to the max for my rifle.
You veteran 45-70 loaders must have some method of making sure you don't "dismantle" the rifle with the powders I have already used.
Any advice, tips, pointers, etc. welcomed.
I have a chrono.
Don't have lab level stuff to measure pressures.

Thanks Guys and Gals

[shooter]

I do a fair amount of loading for the 45-70. All with cast bullets in a Marlin 1895. I don't dabble with max loads, so I can't speak much as to pressure signs. I don't really see them with the loads I use. I will say that I have tried several powders, RL 7 being one of them, but the most accurate load out of my particular gun is 45.5 gr. of 3031 over a 405 gr. cast bullet. Should be moving about 1600 fps, and is a trapdoor level load, which means you'll have no trouble with it in your 1895.

Well, I know I didn't answer your question, but I hope someone comes along that can. Several people on here should be able to.

[Old Ranger]

By the very nature of the cartridge design, you might not see the "classic" signs of pressure you see with necked smokless cartridges. Cratered primers may appear, but it is understood by those that design them, that a levergun will "let go" before it will show real excessive pressure signs. But I, for one, do not believe that the .45-70 should be treated as a "Magnum" round. Especially in a lever gun. The 1895 Marlin is a strong action, but it was never intended to go way into the extreme of magnum class rounds. If I needed a dynamic and heavy rifle to shoot massive loads, I'll get a .458 Win Mag or similar. My suggestion would be to remain within the published loading data on this cartridge and avoid any possible disaster from grossly overloading this cartridge/weapon platform.

Wade

[Griff]

IMO, the 45-70 is at its peak performance at under 1500 fps. And if you're using heavy projectiles, 450 grains & up, 1200 is plenty. I think you'll see greater penetration with the slower rounds and heavier bullets. Especially if you use bullets designed for that velocity... Trying to use .458 Mag fps level bullets will not perform unless you use them in a cartridge made for those velocities. The only loss will be your trajectory. Also, IMO, the Marlin 1895 is NOT a strong action. From what I've read they almost always seem to let go in the web between the breech and the mag tube. There's far less metal there than there is is other calibers in the same sized receiver.

Working for more velocity in that cartridge can be counter-productive. YMMV.

[.45colt]

You Sir have more experience than I, and I will caution You with all respect on the Marlin 1895. I have one and heed the Lyman manuals on loading for the Marlin. it is not as strong as an 1886 Winnie or a Ruger no 1 and We have seen several blowups with the Marlin in recent years. My advice is not to push it to top end with this design. Good Luck. here is one.blowup.
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylo ... aboom1.jpg

[Old Savage]

Pressures do not reach classic pressure sign territory.

[358 Win]

I never try to see if I can get pressure signs in my Marlin 45-70 GS , I shoot 420 grain cast bullets that reach 1650 fps, that is enough for me and anything that I intend to hunt.
I have tried many different loads with the Marlin and my B78 Browning, the Marlin penetrated further with less powder and fuss than did the Browning with faster loads.
I don't know how this works, but I know it does for me anyway.

[Old Savage]

Probably the best idea - it is a 45-70. If you want speed get a 270.

[Ranch Dog]

As a guy that has shot quite a bit of pressure trace recordings with 1895s in both the 45-70 Govt and 450 Marlin, my advice is to adhere to the levergun data outfits such Hodgdon's provide. If the data you select to use doesn't not cover leverguns, stick with the SAAMI level data. I've pushed the leverguns quite hard and you will not see any pressure signs to know you have reached a dangerous point. Loaded to the SAAMI level, the 45-70 Govt cartridge is a credible critter getter.

[JFE]

You should try to get hold of an article published in Handloader magazine by Brian Pearce (issue 248; sep 2007).

In that article he discusses various design aspects of the Marlin 1895 and, more importantly, supplied pressure tested data for loading the 45/70 loaded to various pressure levels. He provides his reasoning as to why the rifle was good for 43.5K pressures and the data provides very useful guidance on acceptable handloads.

Personally I find that loads generating sub 30k pressures generate all the performance I need from a light levergun and all the recoil I can handle. This still provides fairly decent performance (eg 400-420 gr at 1850 fps). To markedly increase pressure and recoil for an extra 100-200 fps, to my mind at least, is not a good trade off.

[Old Savage]

Oh I see, you wanted pressure signs. These are my own pictures - not my rifle.



As you know - you are already there as to what this cartridge can do. Want more - 458 Win.

[Ranch Dog]

You should try to get hold of an article published in Handloader magazine by Brian Pearce (issue 248; sep 2007).

In that article he discusses various design aspects of the Marlin 1895 and, more importantly, supplied pressure tested data for loading the 45/70 loaded to various pressure levels. He provides his reasoning as to why the rifle was good for 43.5K pressures and the data provides very useful guidance on acceptable handloads.

Personally I find that loads generating sub 30k pressures generate all the performance I need from a light levergun and all the recoil I can handle. This still provides fairly decent performance (eg 400-420 gr at 1850 fps). To markedly increase pressure and recoil for an extra 100-200 fps, to my mind at least, is not a good trade off.

I sure agree with your assessment on this subject JFE but am shy of Pearce's reasoning on the 43.5K loads in the 45-70. The higher pressure is acceptable in the 450 Marlin because of the use of "V" barrel threads and a treated locking bolt. The 45-70 uses standard square cut threads and a standard locking bolt. The pictures that Old Savage has submitted shows where the 1895 (45-70 Govt) typically gives way, in the area where barrel threads meet magazine tube. The point where there is not much metal. The use of the "V" threads provides quite a bit more meat at this point. I've taken down my two rifles and had them right next two each other and the difference is noticable.

From the pressure trace side of a load at 40.0 to 42.0K vs. 43.5K, you are looking at 35 to 50 FPS depending on the bullet used and it doesn't make a hill of beans in terminal performance. This is the issue I have been pondering with my Rossi 45-70. It uses square cut thread and the smaller 336 (vs 1895) receiver. I have done some shooting at 35.0K PSI but think I might settle in at loads at 30.0K PSI. The whitetail and very large feral hog I shot with my 350-grain bullet did not seem to notice the degraded performance.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

I would say with the Sierra you're in the 40kpsi zone but with the Remington you're in the 34kpsi zone assuming you're talking about a 24" barrel. If you have something shorter, then your pressures are necessarily higher to achieve the velocities you quoted.

Most people feel that 1800fps for that Remington 405 is a reasonable limit. It doesn't have a really heavy jacket and thus behaves well at these moderate levergun velocities. Nonetheless, I'm sure there are people around pushing it much harder for reasons unknown.

For the Sierra, are you at about 52.5 grains of IMR4198 or 54.0 of RL-7 for that 2286fps?

For the Remington, is that about 40.0 grains of IMR4198 or 41.5 of RL-7 for the 1776fps?

Just curious. I don't think I'd go any farther on the Sierra loads than you already are. They're at 3500 foot-pounds of energy already. Here's hoping you've got a nice Decelerator pad on the back of that Marlin. You're at a nice 2837fpe on the Remington.

A case full to the bottom of the Remington bullet of 3031 (a smidge over 48 grains) might get 1800fps and would probably result in somewhat lower pressures (30kpsi'ish) if you have some handy. I'm assuming you're loading to 2.55" OAL. I don't think you can get anywhere near 2286fps with the Sierra and 3031 ... at least not without a 45-90 case and an 1886.

When Ranch Dog mentions 1850fps from the 45-70 with sub-30k pressures and 400-420 grain bullets, I assume he's probably shooting lead so he gets a bit of a benefit over your jacketed loads. His avatar gives him away.

[piller]

I reload my .45-70 with IMR3031 and like it in the trapdoor or maybe slightly above range. Better accuracy and less kick that way. If I really want more, I'll buy a .375 H&H or bigger. Although, I just don't need that. My .45-70 did quite well for me in Africa. I did use some of Grizzly's +P loads there, but I don't want to use them all the time. Marlins just don't seem to be quite strong enough to handle a steady diet of +P, and I like the milder loads for everything here in the Good Old U.S.A., except for maybe the Alaskan Brown Bears which I have never hunted. I do think you will find better accuracy if you keep your pressure and velocity down a little. I sure do.

[earlmck]

Still looking for pressure signs that I am close to the max for my rifle.

Your previous loading experience has been working with modern cartridges and very strong actions in which your first reliable pressure sign probably is a slightly increased effort to lift the bolt. And that increased effort comes about because you exceeded some brass elasticity parameters, somewhere north of 60,000 psi. When you work with weaker actions that are not designed for 60,000 psi loads you can't go looking for that kind of pressure sign because you've got a good chance of seeing a wrecked gun (like in Old Savage's picture) before you get the stiffened extraction.

So your best bet is to stick with load book guidelines generally. And if you go off on your own, say with a powder not covered by a loading manual, try to figure how to keep your loads within the pressures the action was designed for without the benefit of "pressure signs" from your brass cartridge case. Kind of an interesting challenge, isn't it?

[Malamute]

Many consider primer apearance to be "pressure signs". Most flattening of primers comes after the level you want to be loading most levers to, especially the 45-70 in the 1895. Flattened primers (and then backing off some) isn't indicative of "whats safe for that gun", its a pressure level that may well be past what that gun/cartridge is capable of taking, at least regularly. Even backing off a little from flattened primers can be way above what's safe for a particular cartridge or gun. Measuring case head expansion is more reliable. Primers aren't a truly reliable way to determine pressures in any event, there are too many variables to be always consistant as to exactly what pressure level is being acheived.

I dont know if you are considering primers to be "pressure signs", but thought I'd throw that into the discussion in case somebody came along later reading this and figured they had it figured out what they were looking at as regards pressure signs.

[Buck Elliott]

My standard .45-70 load for my '86 Extra Light Rifle consists of the 405-grain Oregon Trail bullet on top of 56.0 grains of H-335. That lies right in the middle of Speer's recommended loads for their 400 grain jacketed slug, and gives me 1890fps from a 22" barrel. It is a deadly-accurate combination, arrived at after much experimenting. For my money, H-335 is THE powder for Serious .45-70 levergun loads, with that bullet weight, cast or jacketed..

[JFE]

The trouble with a lot of the cases of Marlin 1895's blowing-up is that the details and circumstances generally tend to be sketchy. Are they the result of overloads, a barrel obstruction, double charging reduced loads or perhaps some other reason. In any event they do seem to come apart in spectacular fashion, parting, as RD pointed out, at their weakest point.

It really surprises me that as part of relocating the Marlin manufacturing operation and setting up new equipment, Remington didnt beef up the action in that critical area and maybe extend the action to allow longer and perhaps even larger cartridges.

[Buck Elliott]

Bigger and longer cartridges are not on the 95s horizon, I'm afraid.. That would require a Major revamp of the gun's design, which costs money -- an awful lot of money -- which the company might never recoup.

The 336/"1895" platform is perfectly adequate for its intended use, but has a very slim margin of safety, for those who insist on pushing the envelope. As OS's photo shows, there is an inherent weakness in the gun's design, which limits its hot rodding abilities.. The good folks at Big Horn Armory conucted tests, which attested to my conclusions from years ago, that pressures in the 60,000+ psi range will batter the action's locking mechanism, but still not produce the catastrophic failure shown in the photo.. That took some doing!!!!

Would that the folks at Marlin had chosen to resurrect the true 1895 action, instead of going on the cheap and adapting the marginally-satisfactory 336...

[AJMD429]

What about the .444 Marlin...?

Do we just not hear about kabooms with it because it is not as common a cartridge, or is it enough smaller that there is more 'meat' in the critical areas?

[Old Savage]

Buck, that one had been converted to 458 Alaskan and had had thousands of rounds through it. The load it let go on was not a particularly hot one but was ignited with a pistol primer and appear to kick the bullet into the barrel before the bulk of the powder ignited. It blew from the barrel back. But, I think we have seen the same thing with some with 45-70s and other handloads. I don't think I have seen one shown verified where it happened with a factory load. But as you say that thin bottom may be an issue.

AJ, I have thought the same thing as the 444 may have enough safety margin that it doesn't happen and the 458 Alaskan makes it worse. Jack Huntington refused to do that conversion for that reason.

[Buck Elliott]

While the .444 case is somewhat smaller in diameter, the barrel shank diamter is the same. Note also that pressures for the .444 are SAAMI mandated at 44,000 CUP, MAX, which is pretty mild, by modern standards.. I know there are shooters who stretch the .444 beyond that, without apparent difficulty, but that may be beside the point... And most .444 guys accept it for what it is.

[Buck Elliott]

Thanks for the clarification, OS... The case diameter of the .458 Alaskan is even greater than the .45-70, meaning lots less metal in the barrel shank, and it is obvious that the wreck happened in the first few inches of the barrel.

Both Marlin and Winchester dropped the .307 and .356 winchester chamberings, and it wasn't because of lack of demand...

[6pt-sika]

I had a Marlin 1895 that had been rechambered to 450 AK for awhile . Made chamber cast etc and started to order dies from CH4D . But to be honest I never felt overly comfortable with the thing and ended up selling it without shooting it !