45-70 v. 350 rem mag

forty below

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
got this great deal on a ruger mkII stainless/synthetic in 350 rem mag. bought a burris 1.75 x 5, had stan jackson mount it and do trigger job. i also came across ammo both in 200 gr and 250 gr (both orig remington loadings).

but i still have my 45-70 (stainless marlin guide gun, WWG big loop lever, ashley front/rear sights w/ wings on rear sight)

don't these guns overlap in the performance arena? i know generally the marlin is big bullet and effective range to 150 yds or so, the 350 rem mag out to 250yds or so.

other than the pleasure of owning both, does the 45-70 fill a niche the 350 rem mag doesn't?

forty below
 

BrownBear

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
10,003
Reaction score
245
If I had to give up one of them, I'd dump the Marlin in a heartbeat. It's a good gun and round, but not nearly as versatile as the 350. But I'd hate to dump either one. They both have their uses, and why generalize when you can specialize and own more guns?
 

beartooth

New member
Joined
Feb 19, 2007
Messages
3,092
Reaction score
56
If I had to give up one of them, I'd dump the Marlin in a heartbeat. It's a good gun and round, but not nearly as versatile as the 350. But I'd hate to dump either one. They both have their uses, and why generalize when you can specialize and own more guns?

+1 - I would have to agree with BrownBear
 

forty below

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
the 45-70 may have to go to pay for other acquisitions.

i have yet to sight in the 350 rem mag. it will be my go to gun from now on.

forty below
 

RMiller

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
17
Location
Montana
They are both thumpers.

I would give them each at least 100 yards more range though.

I would use the 45-70 open sighted for short range hunting and scope the 350 for everything else.
 

elmerkeithclone

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
4,171
Reaction score
131
Don't get discouraged if the 200 grain factory fodder doesn't shoot worth a hoot. I know of 2 Rugers and one Remington that won't shoot under 2" with them! In my opinion if your going to replace your 45-70 with the 350 then you will want to shoot the 250 grain stuff any way!
 

forty below

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
woody,

i will give you a shout if/when i sell. i will decide here in the next month or so.


elmerkeithclone,

i have heard of the 200 grain prob. i bought several of these boxes to use for caribou and did pick up 250 grainers for moose, bear. i don't reload, so have been picking up ammo here and there. i want to pick up a few boxes of the HMS grandslam for the 350 rem mag. they stuff 250 grain sierra grand slams and claim velocity/energy that i have not seen posted anywhere.

forty below
 

Murphy

Moderator
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
4,438
Reaction score
137
Location
Midwest
got this great deal on a ruger mkII stainless/synthetic in 350 rem mag. bought a burris 1.75 x 5, had stan jackson mount it and do trigger job. i also came across ammo both in 200 gr and 250 gr (both orig remington loadings).

but i still have my 45-70 (stainless marlin guide gun, WWG big loop lever, ashley front/rear sights w/ wings on rear sight)

don't these guns overlap in the performance arena? i know generally the marlin is big bullet and effective range to 150 yds or so, the 350 rem mag out to 250yds or so.

other than the pleasure of owning both, does the 45-70 fill a niche the 350 rem mag doesn't?

forty below

Let's not get too practical here. Why does there have to be a niche filled to justify or validate keeping or owning any gun. Oh, I understand the money issue and sometimes that is the weighty factor but that has nothing to do with being practical, groceries and rent are necessities, but the practical element is way over played. This gun is for bears, this one is or moose and this one is for squirrels....everything is covered.

Not so with guns, as with women, being practical has nothing to do with it.;) It is perfectly alright to own more than one gun for one purpose or to own several with overlapping capabilities.

To try to be serious about this I would say that the 45-70 lever gun regardless of the niche it fills is an entity in and of its own. It can and it has been the only rifle owned or needed for over a century of lever guns. I would prefer that caliber in a vintage lever such as a 1895 of the turn of the century (1900) or an 1886 of the same era. Today this is a nostalgic thing rather than being practical, even though the caliber/rifle is quite useful still.

Certainly we have other calibers that will serve the same purpose, though not in the lever. As for the 350 bolt gun it is to me neither fish nor foul and is only useful and adequate for a range of uses not the best of any, jack-of-all, master-of-none kind of thing. So it is general duty, in a more of a "get by" rifle than an efficient getter for any application. The 45-70 cartridge of today (modern loading) is more of a master or near master at one end and mediocre at the middle, I think the 350 is a mediocre on middle ground so you still have niches yet to fill.

If we could get away from practical and logical for a few minutes you could see the niche (of the 350) filled more apprppriately with other calibers, and some of the same ballistics and some better. The 350's appeal is from the availability of those ballistics in that package. That short and handy, light and nimble platform of the 600/660/673 carbine. Or some other over the counter similar gun. That need/desire has turned that short squat belted bumkin of a caliber in to the holy grail of do all cartridges. I fail to see the attraction of it. We aren't attracted to women of the same shape.:rolleyes:

Just to hold the cartridges of this ballistic niche in our hands would fill them with many handsome candidates. The 35 whelen will work as well in an 18" barreled rifle as the 350. The 376 Steyr will display prowess above and beyond the capability of the 35's with greater versatility and range of bullet weights. The 338-06 will handle heavier bullets better than the stubby 350 with better sectional density and exterior ballistics. The 338/358/375 caliber WSMs that never was'ms would be a great pack of hungry wolves to devour any niche that could befall a hunter carrying a short and handy rifle. But then, that would not be practical.
 
Last edited:

forty below

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
so many guns, so little time...

so many guns, so little time...

murphy,

i'm pickin up what yer layin down!

you are correct. cost has been a prime factor with this group of guns, since my hunting tends to be for food, and not so much for the annual safari to africa, or brown bear hunt for wall trophies--which i would enjoy, just don't have the time or $$ for at this point in life.

the context of my rifle battery is that i live, hunt above the arctic circle. most hunting is on a honda or snogo, some by boat. species hunted are primarily caribou and moose in grizz, not brown bear country.

i did buy my boys a remington model 7 stainless in 7mm-08, they also have a marlin bolt 22 mag and rossi combo 17hmr and .410 shotgun.

i have always wanted a ruger no 1 in 375 h&h, but at present don't have the need (just want) for it. if/when i move back to the road system, the 375 would be higher on the list.

i also recently purchased my first bowen-ized revolver. shortened super redhawk in 44 mag. will load with garrett 330s for field.

other guns to add to the battery include a ruger 45 cal single action, ruger single six in 17hmr, and a 243 in a make yet to be determined.

i agree that more guns the merrier, and as the budget allows i intend to do just that.

forty below
 
Top