Most Accurate 45-70 Repro?

[ckpj99]

I'd like to get 45-70 single shot reproduction (likely Italian made, probably something in the Dixie Gun inventory just to give you a range of things I know about) for shooting smokeless cartridges at long range. I reload light (as in charge, not bullet weight) lead loads already.

I currently own an actual Springfield trapdoor made in 1886, but every time I pull the trigger I feel like I'm abusing the gun. It shows no signs of fatigue or extra wear, but it's almost 130 years old. Also, it is just not all that accurate despite trying a lot of different reloads (I'd say 30% of my groups are 3" or less at 100 yards, and 70% are 5-6", the variation is frustrating).

I'd like to get something for less than $1500, preferably closer to $1000. I'd like something with a slightly thicker barrel, so I can shoot longer strings without the barrel getting super hot. I only mention that because there are some thinner barreled hunter models that seem like they would get pretty hot at the range. I'd like the option for tang sights.

I like the Sharps, Rolling Block and High Wall repros, but my main concern is accuracy. I'd like the gun to be as accurate as possible. I'm not worried about shooting really hot loads or jacketed loads. I'd just like to sling lead accurately.

What would you recommend?

[BumbleBug]

Not exactly classic old school, but a Ruger #1 would fit your needs exactly. Extremely accurate with cast or jacket bullets & a pure joy to shoot. I love my .45-70 & I have a number of loads from 1100 cast to 2500 jacketed fps that clover leaf.

Have fun!

...bug

[NoSecondBest]

I've owned three Pedersoli 1874 Sharps replicas and they all shot very, very well. I could get 1moa groups with five shots on a good eye day. Pedersoli makes some of the best barrels to be had at any price range. The fit and finish on their guns is top notch. Check Cabela's and see what they have right now. They sell them on sale at least once a year and you can get a great price on one when they are on sale. They also sell several different models. Check Cherry's too, they specialize in Pedersoli rifles and are a big distributor.

[mete]

Davide Pedersoli is very knowledgeable about guns .He also has a fine reputation for making his guns accurate.

[Scorch]

Get a Highwall reproduction. They dominated target shooting in the late 1800s.

[NoSecondBest]

I've got three High Walls, two Pedersoli's and one Win/Miroku. You don't want any of them for target shooting. They are very accurate but way too light for extended shooting sessions. Check out BPCR web site or ASSRA web site and you'll see that no one is using them for competition/target shooting. If you simply wanted some informal range sessions with light loads they are fine, but for extended long range shooting they will soon beat you up due to weight.

[Jim Watson]

I have a Winchester Single Shot .38-55. As No says, at 10 lbs, it would be too light for much shooting in .45-70.
My 11+ lb Browning BPCR .40-65 is about right for me, but there are a lot of them doing good work in .45-70. Hard to find these days and not cheap.

The bargain in single shot rifles is the C Sharps 1875. I don't know what there is about it that lets them build it for $500 less than an 1874, but it does not keep it from shooting well. List price of $1425 and you still have to cough up the money for sights, but it is a better choice than an import.
http://csharpsarms.com/catalog-detai...ing-Rifle.html

[DPris]

You're not going to do very well in long-range targeting in the .45-70 for $1000.

A Ruger #1 would not be a particularly good candidate.
It's too light, built for hunting, not for long range target shooting.
Sight options are more limited than Sharps repros (which is not saying you can't upgrade the Ruger).

The Pedersoli guns can be good shooters, not as well-fitted as either the C Sharps or Shiloh Sharps.

You'll need good sights, which adds more cash to the project.

For long range, a heavier rifle in that caliber is a better choice than a light gun.
Denis

[T. O'Heir]

3" to 6" at 100 yards isn't exactly shabby for a 130 year old milsurp. Especially one that wasn't built for target shooting. Trapdoors were nobodies choice either. Chosen for political reasons.
Anyway, as mentioned, look into the Sharps.

[44 AMP]

A Ruger #1 would not be a particularly good candidate.
It's too light, built for hunting, not for long range target shooting.

While I don't think its really what the OP is looking for, I have to disagree with the Ruger No.1 .45-70 being too light. (and yes, I know too heavy or too light is an individual opinion)

The .45-70 is a heavy chunk of steel, barrel wise. No, its not a massive bull/octagon barrel (although I have seen one rebarreled with an octagon, impressive), but they do have what I feel is significant heft.

While I don't own one, I have handled them, and they should be quite comfortable shooting black powder level loads. I have a No.1 in .375H&H, it weighs "a ton" (all barrel).

I have a .45-70 No.3. That is a light .45-70. again, my opinion, for what its worth. A friend who has a couple of the Pedersolli Sharps won't shoot my Ruger, its "too light" for him.

Most accurate "repro"? probably someone's modern Sharps. My experience with .45-70s is that they shoot pretty well, with the right load. My No.3, skinny barrel and all will put 3 shots in 2 holes at 50yds, with a 2.5x Post scope. The gun might even do better, but I can't.

[Jim Watson]

The standard Ruger No 1 .45-70 is a 1A with a 22" tapered barrel and skinny Alex Henry foreend. Hardly a heavy chunk of steel. It weighs about 7.5 lbs. Mine kicked like a SOB and was not very accurate with cast bullets. Been a great hunting rifle with JSPs but that is not my game.

[DPris]

Ruger would have been better off, I think, in putting a "Tropical" weight barrel on the .45-70 No. 1.

Mine, the single most "developed" rifle I've ever owned or worked with, in terms of factory and handload variations with a wide range of bullet types & weights, did not do well at all with lead.

It also kicked like a sumbitch.

It killed my watch when I was trying different bench positions. Tried curling my left arm around under the gun, leaving the fore-end resting un-restricted on a rest, at one point. Did not realize that was leaving MY wrist too close in a direct line behind the GUN'S wrist, and recoil drove the rifle back to where its pistolgrip impacted the watch. Cracked crystal, dead watch.

I tried compressed loads with 300-grainers & a buncha heavier stuff up the scale.
I could & did get excellent accuracy at 100 yards with a couple loads, but I'd go home after each test session with a headache, and it'd take most of a week for the shoulder to quit hurting enough to go do another test session.
And that was while using a PAST shooting bra.

Light loads were not a real problem, but when you're loading up for long range shooting (typically far beyond 100 yards), you want a hefty bullet & a hefty powder charge.

I'll repeat- the Ruger's a nice hunter, but it ain't no long range target rifle.
I'll also echo Jim: "Hardly a heavy chunk of steel."

There's a reason why the heavier Sharps patterns are used for long range targeting, and it's not entirely because of their accuracy.

Shooting maybe two rounds max of hot .45-70, probably standing up, at a deer is one thing.
Shooting heavy bullets in front of big powder charges at targets several times successively from bench & other rifle positions is entirely different.

CK doesn't define "long range" for his context, but there isn't anywhere near enough elevation in the Ruger's sights for anything beyond 500 yards or so, best I recall.
There are numerous tang & front sight options for the Sharps rifles that install easily & work great out to 1000 yards.
Ruger, not so much.

The high .45-70 trajectory arc demands appropriate irons for longer distances, and the Ruger is simply configured for shorter shooting.
I've never heard of anybody trying to run it beyond a couple hundred yards.

COULD be done, but the weight remains a problem.
COULD be re-barreled, but why bother?
Denis

[ckpj99]

Thank you all for the really great insights here.

I think I may have slightly over stated my need for a heavy barrel. I just mean in relation to the Trapdoor barrel, which to me seems really thin, or maybe just made of primitive metal, or maybe both.

I don't ever sit and shoot 100 rounds in a session. 20 is average, 40 if I'm at the range for a whole day or something.

I'm quite content shooting five rounds and letting the gun sit for a few minutes. With the trapdoor, I've found that shooting five rounds and letting the gun sit even 10 minutes doesn't let the barrel cool very much, so after an hour of five round sessions there is still quite a bit of cumulative heat that builds up in the barrel, which can't be good for accuracy.

My trapdoor's barrel is a 32" tapered round measuring .728 inches at the barrel. The Pedersoli Sharps I've been checking out ( http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product...roducts_id=981 ) is a 32" tapered octagon measuring .865 at the barrel. Combine that with the fact that's made of modern steel, probably has much nicer rifling, and doesn't have a full length wood stock with barrel bands, I would imagine it would shoot WAY better than my trapdoor. Am I right in assuming that?

I know my initial question was what is the most accurate repro. I think I've learned that I can't afford it, lol. So would getting a Sharps repro from Pedersoli be a big improvement over what I'm currently shooting?

[DPris]

The Pedersoli .45-70s that I've had here have all shot well, with one exception (ironically a recent tricked-out Trapdoor version with multiple sights & an under-barrel cleaning rod). That one just couldn't shoot consistently & cracked its stock in two places.
An aberration on that one. Two other Pedersoli Trapdoors I've worked with in the past shot quite well.

Trapdoors are about the weakest actions available in .45-70.

Normally, Pedersoli Sharps rifles are good for long range & some substantial loads.
Lotta guys shoot 'em in competition.
They just don't come quite up to the fit & finish standards of the domestic Sharps rifle makers.

The one you mention, with GOOD sights and GOOD loads, would be a major step up over your vintage Trapdoor.
Denis

[Boncrayon]

There are many 45-70 Repros, but I just acquired a "Remington"-make 45-70 with 36" replacement blued barrel and William's aperture rear sight. A real joy to shoot at the range. At my age, It use a shoulder pad, but has the accuracy at 100 yards, even with my elderly sight!

[michaelcj]

Don't think I could improve upon my Browning 1885. Bought it new back in the early 90's… and I'll never "outshoot" it. Lyman 17 front, and Williams rear.

God son took a Buffalo with it a few years back…so he gets it when I go.

Mike

[mehavey]

Have had one of the original Shiloh `74 Sharps built by Wolfgang Droge in Farmingdale NY before moving to Big Timber (35 years ago), and another Perdersoli `74 of late.

The Shiloh is a jewel, while the Pedersoli is pure mechanical competence.

And competence is more than good enough:



First load/shots through it one year ago:
#1 Sighter at 50 (move to 100)
#2. Sighter at 100 (adjust)
#3-#6 for record at 100 as shown (flier is #5..., or maybe just my eyes)