Strength comparisons for Marlin, Henry and Rossi in 45-70?

[bluesman423]

I understand that the Marlin 1895 series of lever rifles is exceptionally strong and can take very high pressures .................... but what about the Henry and Rossi in the same caliber?

Can anybody point me to any strength testing done, especially on the Henry?

[Chuck 100 yd]

Rossi makes a .45-70 levergun ???

[AJMD429]

I have read that the Marlin is NOT as strong as the Winchester, and there seem to be more internet photos of 'kabooms' with them than most other guns (but they are also fairly common guns).

There is NOT a whole lot of metal in the breech area and especially between the barrel hole and magazine hole in the receiver.

I don't know about the Henry's or Rossi's, although I'd bet the Henry's are really well-made, given the company's general operating principles.

I looked at cross-sections of the Marlin in 45-70 versus the Marlin in 444, and due to the much larger base diameter of the 45-70, there was a pretty big difference in the amount of metal around the chamber, so I stick with 'cowboy' level loads in my 45-70, and use modern (i.e. 'hot' but SAAMI) loads for the 444.

(Since my BHA 89 lobs a 400 grain 50-caliber JFN at just over 2,000 fps from 18" barrel, I am seriously considering whether to keep the Marlin 45-70's I have; I'm not sure what the safe velocity limit would be for a 400-405 grain jacketed bullet from a Marlin Guide Gun, but no way I'd try for 2,000 fps...!)

Having said all that - I'm not a gunsmith...!

[sore shoulder]

The Marlin is not as strong as the Winchester 1886, however it is much stronger than almost any other rifle in 45-70 barring the single shots, and can be safely loaded much hotter than cowboy level, many reloading manuals have a Marlin 1895 level in their 45-70 section and it is significantly hotter than a cowboy load. I have loaded a Marlin a lot hotter than I'll post here, as have many others, and I can state emphatically that anyone blowing up a 1895 is doing something seriously wrong in their loading, like a double load wrong, not just a little over the book. I know nothing about the Rossi or the Henry, but I doubt they are any stronger than the Marlin.

[Griff]

Doc is right, the Marlin is NOT exceptionally strong, unless you're comparing it to a Trapdoor... It falls short of the 1886... and since what I've seen the Henry & Rossi are not dimensionally different, I don't think they're much better. Various single shots and the Winchester 1886, especially the modern versions by Miroku are much stronger.

[sore shoulder]

Max Hodgen 45-70 (lever action), which includes the Marlin 1895, load for 400gr is 50.5 gr 4198 for 2,002 fps at 39,400 cup which is below the 42,000 cup the action is rated for. that is of course from a 24" barrel. in theory at 25 fps per in you lose 150 fps in a guide gun, in reality its about 100 . I can easily make that up with a bit more powder and still be safe. I have logs from 15 years ago going well past that with absolutely no issues other than a sore shoulder. This is not new or unknown information concerning the Marlin 1895. I dont know how these accusations of the 1895 being weak keep coming back up, there have been double digit paged discussions on the subject here going back 3 forum editions (yes, this is the third edition of Leverguns, my initial signup was in 2001). You guys need to update your information.

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Doc is right, the Marlin is NOT exceptionally strong, unless you're comparing it to a Trapdoor... It falls short of the 1886... and since what I've seen the Henry & Rossi are not dimensionally different, I don't think they're much better. Various single shots and the Winchester 1886, especially the modern versions by Miroku are much stronger.

True that,
The Henry and the Rossi Rio are basically an 1895/336 style action and all three will be limited compared to the Win 86. It's not so much about the metal around the chamber. It has more to do with the engagement angle of the breech bolt to the locking bolt. The strongest angle would be perpendicular 90°. But, once fired the action binds up. So, the engagement angle of the locking bolt to the breech bolt has to be laid back enough to allow the action to open. But, once they reach a certain pressure (somewhere beyond 45,000 psi) they tend to fly open whacking your fingers at best and wrecking the gun and body parts worst case.

[sore shoulder]

Doc is right, the Marlin is NOT exceptionally strong, unless you're comparing it to a Trapdoor... It falls short of the 1886... and since what I've seen the Henry & Rossi are not dimensionally different, I don't think they're much better. Various single shots and the Winchester 1886, especially the modern versions by Miroku are much stronger.

True that,
The Henry and the Rossi Rio are basically an 1895/336 style action and all three will be limited compared to the Win 86. It's not so much about the metal around the chamber. It has more to do with the engagement angle of the breech bolt to the locking bolt. The strongest angle would be perpendicular 90°. But, once fired the action binds up. So, the engagement angle of the locking bolt to the breech bolt has to be laid back enough to allow the action to open. But, once they reach a certain pressure (somewhere beyond 45,000 psi) they tend to fly open whacking your fingers at best and wrecking the gun and body parts worst case.

It is well past 45,000 psi/42,000cup. I know, my fingers have been there. In any event that is well above the 30,000 cup cowboy load level.

[Blaine]

It falls short of the 1886

Some, but not by much. Buffalo Bore doesn't see any difference between Marlin, JapChester-1886, Rossi Rio Grands, and a couple others.
Using various loads of H-4198 I've loaded 405s to 2000, and 300s to 2200....per a Chrony.
Buffalo Bore will never say what powder they use. Go read what info, and rifle recommendations they DO publish.

Don't try these at home until you've done the reading and research, and own a chrony. Even then, YMMV.
All those killer loads are unnecessary, anyway. 405s @ 16-1700 or 300s @ 1900 are not unduly harsh and will do just fine. Heck, GreenBox 405 Trapdoor loads will kill anything in CONUS.

[missionary5155]

It is interesting how often this question does pop up.
Reloading manuals have been around for all my reloading life and my dad's. If a 95% 45-70 load of one listed in a manual is not enough "power" to do the needed job get closer. Or as the wise have often done .. get a bigger bore gun.
I can attest that the 500 Alaskan (like the 50-110) will sort out all lever gun matters if you place one of those 520 + grain slugs where the respirator and blood pump are located. A caliber .512 flat nose cast slug smacking into a target at 1800 fps makes for one awesome reaction visible and audible. If only there were a few stay tri-ceratops still roaming about to do some village feeding programs.

[AJMD429]

I have loaded a Marlin a lot hotter than I'll post here, as have many others, and I can state emphatically that anyone blowing up a 1895 is doing something seriously wrong in their loading, like a double load wrong, not just a little over the book.

I believe that. I'm thinking they are shooting after a squib is stuck in the barrel, or shooting a 'Ruger-only' load, or.....both, most of the time.

I still like thicker metal (...but maybe that just means more shrapnel if it kabooms... )

[sore shoulder]

I have loaded a Marlin a lot hotter than I'll post here, as have many others, and I can state emphatically that anyone blowing up a 1895 is doing something seriously wrong in their loading, like a double load wrong, not just a little over the book.

I believe that. I'm thinking they are shooting after a squib is stuck in the barrel, or shooting a 'Ruger-only' load, or.....both, most of the time.

I still like thicker metal (...but maybe that just means more shrapnel if it kabooms... )

Nothing wrong with thicker metal. I for one would love to be able to chamber a Marlin in 450 Alaskan and push a 700g cast to 1500 fps. The WWG hybrid action that basically combined the 1886 and 1895 would be a nice candidate. For me the reason to get an 1886 would be a 50-110 takedown, which happens to be on my "when I start a collection" list.

Back to blown up marlins. There was a bullet swager who did a lot of custom swaying for very large caliber nitro express cartridges. He liked to play around with a guide gun. He somehow got a mislabeled can of powder and loaded up what after investigation amounted to something like a 3x overload. The gun did not blow up. It did stick the action shut and required some serious work to get the action open. i don't recall if it was still safe to use. I'm sure Blaine remembers that one.

[marlinman93]

What always puzzles me is why people continue to want to push guns up to and past their normal levels? All three of the guns mentioned will handle the major factory ammunition made, and kill anything in North America with ease. So why do people want to see how far they can push them, and attempt to blow a good gun up?

[Grizz]

didn't part of this discussion have to do with Paco running 454 in Marlins v.s. W92s? I thought the bottom line was that the frame was stretching enough to prevent proper head spacing. Anyone remember those details?

I once did a video to prove that a commercial 45/70/420 load could not penetrate as much water as a 45/70/525 load at much lower velocity. In that experiment I loaded some of Marshall's 425gr hardcast with H322 and WLR primers for a comparison to the commercial load. I loaded 10 rounds with 50gr of powder and 5 rounds with more, I won't publish it, but it was Marshall's max load that he shot in his Marlin.

The 50gr load was equal to the commercial round in penetration and I think in velocity. The 425gr bullet over 50gr averaged 1963 fps. (!) and in my notes I stated that the max load would be too hot for my marlins. I still have those 5 rounds waiting for me to break out my H&R to find out what they can do. I'm guessing they will handily overcome the drag penalty of the 32" barrel!

The 1963fps load wanted to pop the lever on my guide gun, which tells me that my lockup is not engineered as well as it might be. The restriction on my Marlins is self-imposed. I don't doubt that the top load would be happy in my B-1886.

One of my points is that every gun is different, and those Marlins that have better lockups may be safer for hotter loads. I don't use hot loads in my normal hunting rounds. I down-load, often a couple of steps from Marshall's pressure tested loads. I just am not curious enough to try to stretch a Marlin receiver.

And one last note. my load info comes from telephone conversations with Marshall. My piledriver info came from a published data table from his website.

[.45colt]

Marlinman93 wrote....."What always puzzles me is why people continue to want to push guns up to and past their normal levels? All three of the guns mentioned will handle the major factory ammunition made, and kill anything in North America with ease. So why do people want to see how far they can push them, and attempt to blow a good gun up?."
EXACTLY!!!

[Blaine]

The majority of the time when a Levergun loses lockup, it's your hand hitting the lever when it recoils....With a dangerously overloaded round, it's much more likely to freeze the action shut than to throw it open.

[Blaine]

What always puzzles me is why people continue to want to push guns up to and past their normal levels? All three of the guns mentioned will handle the major factory ammunition made, and kill anything in North America with ease. So why do people want to see how far they can push them, and attempt to blow a good gun up?

A good question for Elmer Keith. After all, what the hell did he know?

[sore shoulder]

What always puzzles me is why people continue to want to push guns up to and past their normal levels? All three of the guns mentioned will handle the major factory ammunition made, and kill anything in North America with ease. So why do people want to see how far they can push them, and attempt to blow a good gun up?

A good question for Elmer Keith. After all, what the hell did he know?

Not to mention our own Paco Kelly (go to the articles section), and someone a few of you may have heard of P.O. Ackley.

In any event, no one was trying to blow up a gun, just find its full potential. You know, like those cars you like to soup up MM.

[Malamute]

I agree, nobody is trying to ruin a gun, just work with it with loads in a different power and trajectory range.

Keith, despite internet lore, didn't run everything to the stops and beyond all the time. Some of his handloads in 357 and 44 mag, he mentioned he preferred his handloads to be a bit below factory, as they had all the pressure test equipment and such, though he did work with many higher powered loads seeking to expand the potential. The 38 spl, the 44 spl, both were successfully upgraded, and the 44 spl loads he worked up were in the Lyman manuals as standard for any Colt SAA or large frame S&W for many years. Those loads eventually culminated in the 44 magnum, as did the heavy 38 spl loads turn into a factory 357 mag, both of which were loaded heavier from the factory than Keith loaded his loads in 44 spl and 38 spl.

Keith and others worked up loads in the 1886 45-70 of 53 grs 3031, or 54 grs 4895, which push the 400 gr bullets at about 1850 fps. The chamber pressure is around 30,000 CUP if my memory is correct. A substantial improvement in trajectory and power over the black powder level loads, but still quite safe in guns made of appropriate steels.

Ive seen two take-off barrels from early Marlin 1895s that were cracked in the magazine tube area of the chamber, the guy that changed the barrels out for new ones and showed them to me said hed seen others as well. The loads were reportedly in the power/pressure range I noted above I believe, but would have to check to see. I recall at the time (early 90s) that the loads didn't seem all that spectacular. Ive read or been told that Marlin changed the steel and/or heat treat on the 45-70 barrels because of this, and later guns haven't seemed to have much issue with it. I had (not sure where it is now) info on exactly how thin the chamber was at that point, looking at the caliper, it doesn't look very thick. For myself, I run out of fun before I run out of possible velocity increase in either the Marlin or the 1886. Ive been an unabashed fan of the 1886s since about the time I could drive (gas powered vehicles, not horse and buggies).

I'm not sure how water performance translates to game performance, I just don't know. I would venture that if there wasn't improvement in game performance, then higher velocity loads would have likely faded out in the past. Keith and others used them regularly, and considered them better game killers than black powder level loads in jacketed or cast.

[hayabusa]

Malamute, I think I remember Keith in print saying that you could put all the IMR 3031 powder in a 45-70 case and seat the bullet to correct OAL with I think a 405 grain bullet and still be at safe pressure for the lever rifle. My memory could be a little suspect.

busa

[sore shoulder]

No kidding on running out of fun, I have some infamous loads I pulled after shooting 4 or so of them. I think there's an area of velocity for flat nosed cast that has a sweet spot, after that its a lot of bang for little to no return. For a more aero jacketed bullet it flattens it out and extends the energy down range. I have some 350gr Hornady round nose bullets with a load I'll never share with anyone that significantly flatten the trajectory and extend the point blank range. The 560gr hard cast bore rider is just fine at 1450 fps from a guide gun and I woud use that round on anything anywhere.

I don't recall specifics but I do recall the barrels and receiver getting an upgrade in steels and heat treatment, I do not know when that occured. It's also my understanding the stainless models were stronger, something I had forgotten till now that has me rethinking my plans. I also believe they changed the way they cut the threads.

I have a hard time believing a 30,000 cup load cracked a barrel, I think even green box is 32K cup and that couldnt blow up a paper sack. Although those rounds did score me a criminally good deal on a nice barely fired 1895 from your neighbor who said they kicked too hard in a pistol grip model with an actual butt pad.

[Streetstar]

Sticking with factory loads in my Marlin after seeing too many KB's in the inter-web . I am a handloading novice at best though

Since I quit hunting a few years back, the only things I am in danger of killing are silhouettes, -- so with reduced loads, I just need to dial in more elevation


I do have a Ruger #1 i'd like to pump up the jams a little with though -- not to 458 mag level as I've heard before, -- my shoulder doesn't need that abuse, --- but something that'll be easier to hit with at Quigley distances (- err, - 1/4 Quigley distances maybe - )

[Malamute]

I thought that original smokeless 45-70 405 gr jacketed factory loads were in the same general pressure range as black powder loads, like under 18k CUP.

Just looked at the Lyman cast bullet manual. They state that loads between 15K CUP and 17K CUP should ONLY be used in trapdoors in good condition.

The section on the 1886 and Marlin 1895 show loads only up to 28,300 CUP max. I believe that's the level that the Keith loads that are fairly common are loaded to.

The Ruger only section has loads up to 40K CUP.

If anyone is going to shoot 32K CUP loads in a trapdoor, please give me notice so I can not be standing close by at ignition. If you have a phone that does video show me how to use it.

[Malamute]

Malamute, I think I remember Keith in print saying that you could put all the IMR 3031 powder in a 45-70 case and seat the bullet to correct OAL with I think a 405 grain bullet and still be at safe pressure for the lever rifle. My memory could be a little suspect.

busa

I don't recall ever reading that.

The 53 gr 3031 load is close to a full case to the base of the bullet, but one could probably get more in. "Correct overall length" can mean what the factory loads are loaded to, but an 1886 will easily accept a longer load. They do 45-90 length cartridges without drama. Somebody needs to take a pic of a 45-70 in an 1896 action with the bolt open and the cartridge on the carrier ready to feed forward. Theres lots of room, the cartridge looks small in the action. Big change from cramming that cartridge into the 336 action and renaming it 1895. They did make a large frame 1895 back in the day, it was a larger action, not the 336 action that bears the name today. They work fine, but it was not an action specifically designed for the cartridge.

[sore shoulder]

The section on the 1886 and Marlin 1895 show loads only up to 28,300 CUP max. I believe that's the level that the Keith loads that are fairly common are loaded to.

Yes, the Lyman manual is very conservative for all levels of 45-70. Other manuals allow much higher, for all levels of 45-70. I'll dig around tomorrow.

[Malamute]

The main reason I mentioned it was the trapdoor loads. Did the "green box" loads mean the standard level Remington old school 405 gr @ 1310 fps loads meant for all guns including trapdoors? If I misunderstood, my apologies. I don't know of any other green box loads.

Im sure both the Marlin and the 1886 will safely accept higher levels than 28K CUP, though I have no desire to shoot any more than that. The new generation 86s should take more than the originals. Not sure where to draw that line. The Lyman info regarding 1886s pre-date the new generation guns by quite a lot.

[sore shoulder]

The main reason I mentioned it was the trapdoor loads. Did the "green box" loads mean the standard level Remington old school 405 gr @ 1310 fps loads meant for all guns including trapdoors? If I misunderstood, my apologies. I don't know of any other green box loads.
.

I thought they were hotter than that.

[KirkD]

I'll vouch for the 'running out of fun' bit. I once loaded 40 rounds for my 45-70 Browning SRC 1886, that put a 400 grain bullet out the barrel at 2,000 fps. I was just wearing a T-shirt when I tried them out, and that carbine has a steel buttplate. The first round didn't feel very good, the second round I let out a yelp, and by the third round I will confess that I couldn't help but holler. The fourth round convinced me to take the other 36 cartridges home, pull the bullets, and reload them to a sane level.

[Old Savage]

Try 5 grains of Bullseye and a round ball.

[marlinman93]

I realize there's a huge following for both Elmer Keith, and PO Ackley, and their attempts to wring every foot of velocity out of whatever they were shooting. Keith was wonderful to read, and I think I've got most of what he wrote! Without being sacrilegious, and getting flamed by every starry eyed gun guy in the world; not everything they did was good for the gun hobby or hunting.
I have Ackley's two volumes on all his AI cartridges, and although he's wringing out impressive velocities, there's not much mention of how his cartridge improvements compare to the originals in accuracy. Keith was also pushing the limits, and often gave up when accuracy dropped off. Both men set a standard that only contributed to others wanting to try and emulate or beat their results, and occasionally with disastrous end. But even when nothing was ruined, the results of pushing a gun to test it's limits rarely ends in an accurate round.
So go ahead and push them as far as you want, but I'll stop when my gun and cartridges reach a level of the best accuracy they can get, regardless of velocity.

[Grizz]

Malamute,

I think the 28k CUP is SAAMI spec for the 1886. No? Yes?

the other saami spec is the chamber, which the Browning followed religiously, and I think I recall reading that it takes a chamber reamer to get a 45/90 into that chamber. I think I recall that there is about zero leade in the chamber too, maybe? My Browning has a very tight chamber.

the room on the elevator isn't indicative of the room in the chamber.

is it possible that the Winchester built 1886s have a longer chamber?

[Blaine]

Malamute,

I think the 28k CUP is SAAMI spec for the 1886. No? Yes?

the other saami spec is the chamber, which the Browning followed religiously, and I think I recall reading that it takes a chamber reamer to get a 45/90 into that chamber. I think I recall that there is about zero leade in the chamber too, maybe? My Browning has a very tight chamber.

the room on the elevator isn't indicative of the room in the chamber.

is it possible that the Winchester built 1886s have a longer chamber?

My JapChester 1886EL would not easily chamber the loads I made for the Marlin 45-70s.....I had to seat the bullets a bit deeper.

[Grizz]

that was a straight shooter, that one was. almost like a savage 99, heh.

[Blaine]

that was a straight shooter, that one was. almost like a savage 99, heh.

Not my favorite. Seemed unbalanced like a club. Curved metal buttplate was akin to waterboarding.
I'm down to 1 45-70...The Shiloh Sharps. 12 pound monster. Believe it or not, I haven't shot it yet.

[Old Savage]

MM93, with you on that. 400 or 350 at 1800 -1850 fps. Want more, get a Ruger #1.

[Malamute]

Malamute,

I think the 28k CUP is SAAMI spec for the 1886. No? Yes?

the other saami spec is the chamber, which the Browning followed religiously, and I think I recall reading that it takes a chamber reamer to get a 45/90 into that chamber. I think I recall that there is about zero leade in the chamber too, maybe? My Browning has a very tight chamber.

the room on the elevator isn't indicative of the room in the chamber.

is it possible that the Winchester built 1886s have a longer chamber?

My JapChester 1886EL would not easily chamber the loads I made for the Marlin 45-70s.....I had to seat the bullets a bit deeper.

They are notoriously short throated, which of course is a different matter than OAL for feeding. They can be throated by hand. Some cast bullets have thinner noses an allow longer seating in the Miroku 45-70s, but throating them to work with a variety of loads seems better all around.

Id be surprised if the Miroku chambers were any shorter or smaller than spec, but the throat or leade is very short.

Room on the carrier is harder to change than room for a cartridge (or particular bullet) in the chamber. Chambers can be opened to 45-90, though they often require a little work on the loading gate area to "get around the corner". I can force 45-90s into the magazine, or a 500 gr Govt length 45-70 (loaded to same length as 45-90). They just didn't have to for the average 45-70 loads. The original Winchesters that weren't 45-90s, or 50-110 etc sometimes had to have a little more work to get clearance in the loading gate area according to gunsmiths that have converted them.

It does appear that the pressure standard is 28,000psi (in this case also coincides with CUP figures). Id be leery of shooting loads in that pressure range in trapdoors much if at all. I don't know if the spec was changed recently, I seem to recall to being under 20K CUP, but don't know where to look to see if there was a change.

ETA: well, I must be mistaken about the pressure standard, though it seems that the ammo factory loaded in the past was kept to black powder pressure of about 21K CUP.

Interesting bit,

http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/ammun ... nt_100710/

[sore shoulder]

The item that really stands out in that article is the SAAMI pressure 43,500 psi for the .450 Marlin, which as far as I know has only ever been chambered in a 1895. That should settle the action strength debate. Most 45-70 loads are lawyered at 28,000psi to prevent being used in a trap door. Having measured cases that I know were in the 40K range, the comments about the 45-70 case not being strong enough are not accurate.

[Grizz]

That's good info. Thanks for the link.

I noticed that about the 450 . . .

[Malamute]

What is the diameter of the 450 magazine tube?

The action was never that big of a concern regarding the 1895/45-70 (within reason), its the chamber where the barrel is routed out for the mag tube that seems to be the weak point. Using the 444 as a reference point for what a 45-70 should take for pressure isn't really a straight across comparison. The 450 may be, if the magazine tubes are the same diameter.

[sore shoulder]

I'm starting to recall some things about the .450. The barrel had a different style of thread with a flat profile instead of a sharp edge to limit thread depth. I was wondering about the mag tube myself.

[Udy]

The mag tube is considerably smaller diameter than the 45/70, it doesn't have that giant rim to deal with, and its correct they don't grind the bottom of the chamber out near as much as they have to due on the 45/70. I don't know how much that means in strength, but it is fact.

[Griff]

Let's be clear here... the chamber is not any thinner in any particular quadrant... it's the web between the barrel and mag tube that's thinner due to the larger diameters involved than any of the other calibers.

Per the Marlin Owner's Manual for 336, 444 & 1895 firearms:
"Before You Use This Firearm
It is very important that you read
and understand this manual
before using your firearm.
Warnings should be read and
heeded carefully. Also follow
“Marlin's Guide to Gun Safety,”
printed in this manual.

• •WARNING: Marlin firearms are
  designed and manufactured to
  handle standard factory-loaded
  ammunition which conforms to
  SAAMI (Sporting Arms and
  Ammunition Manufacturers’
  Institute Inc.) standards with
  dependability and safety. Due
  to the many bullet and load
  options available, the element
  of judgement involved, the skill
  required, and the fact that serious
  injuries have resulted from
  dangerous handloads, Marlin
  does not make any recommendations
  with regard to handloaded
  ammunition.
  •WARNING: It is a violation of
  federal law to alter or deface
  the serial number of any
  firearm.

"

With factory or SAMMI compliant handloads, I dont' think the modern Marlin 1895 is any less safe than any other rifle... but, it's margin of safety seems less than that of the modern 1886.

[AJMD429]

I'm starting to recall some things about the .450. The barrel had a different style of thread with a flat profile instead of a sharp edge to limit thread depth. I was wondering about the mag tube myself.

I remember reading the same thing.

I think part of the 450 Marlin project was to provide an outlet for the guys who wanted to have a higher-pressure, faster 458 caliber levergun round, without 'hot-rodding' a 45-70. That would reduce the company's liability exposure and bad publicity for Ka-Booms, and would give them a new product to sell with relatively little modification to their tooling.

I'd feel much more comfortable shooting modern 450 Marlin loads in a Malrin than 'modern' 45-70 ones of the same pressure, because of that magazine-cut issue.

[piller]

Learning from others can be a good thing. Elmer Keith ruined a few firearms, and I can use his example as one to avoid. Due to his pioneering efforts, I have access to load data which is safe and will not blow up my gun. I truly admire him, P.O. Ackley, Townsend Wheeland, and others. Just because I admire them, it does not mean that I want to emulate them or even try to surpass them. Heck, I admire the accomplishments of John Glenn. Doesn't mean that I want to get strapped into a rocket and go to outer space.

[Blaine]

We are all, everyone of us, standing on the shoulders of those that have been there, and done that. For some folks, not very many, it's No Brain/No Pain.
When you read about Ruger #1 loads for 45-70, it's my belief, and that of others, that they are a bit higher in pressure because generally you have to trim the brass a hair shorter to get to a usable OAL. For the experience, and I'm not one of them, that means you can coax a little more fps, with a hair less powder if you trim the brass a bit. YMMV, and don't try this at home.

[sore shoulder]

Ok, went back through several manuals. Here is what I found.

Hodgdon Powders. " As a rule the 45-70 falls in to 3 categories: those of relatively weak actions, including original Trapdoor Springfields...original Winchester 86 repeaters and USRAC abd Antique replicas. Marlin model 95 lever actions make up the second category. And the Ruger No. 3 single shots and Browning 1895 single shots. The pressure categories are divided into three sections, one for loads up to 28,000 CUP, the second 40,000 CUP and the last at 50,000 CUP."

My 2004 Hodgdon manual has loads with listed pressures for Marlin 1895 up to 40,000 cup. The online load data matches it.

Hornady. "The following data is intended only for use in the Marlin Model 1895 and should not be used in antique 45-70's or replicas of these older designs. Pressures here are held to 40,000 c.u.p. maximum. This rifle is the same basic action as that of the Marlin 444 which operates at 40,000 c.u.p."

Barnes manual also states in regard to the 1895 in their 45-70 section. "Marlin responded in 1973 with the 45-70. The problem was the lack of reliable pressure tested load data that could take advantage of the additional strength provided by the Marlin 1895 which easily withstood maximum loads in the .444 Marlin at upwards of 43.000 psi."

[piller]

I did use Grizzly Cartridge company's +P 405 grain loads when I went to South Africa with my Marlin Guide Gun. Mike Rintoul advised me that the loads were safe for occasional use in a Marlin, but a steady diet of them would cause premature wear and tear on my gun. I have fired less than 40 total of those rounds. I trust Mike to have done the research since he has an engineering degree. Kind of how your car can hit 6000 rpm but it is recommended that you not do it all the time.

[Griff]

And yet in the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook, while they list 3 load levels also, they have the 1873 Springfield held to about 18,000 CUP, section 2 lists Winchester 1886 & Marlin 1895 to about 28,00 CUP, and section 3 is noted as for Ruger No. 1 & 3 and Mauser 98 actions that have been deemed safe by a gunsmith are held to about 40,000 CUP.

The 444 Marlin compared to one in 45-70 is apples & oranges comparison.
.444:

.45-70:

Hole in the metal for the .45-70 is bigger than that for the .444 Marlin. Ergo, load it lighter! Besides, you can use much heavier bullets. It ain't a magnum!

[sore shoulder]

I would place Hodgdon and Hornady a lot higher on the food chain with a lot more experience with powders and pressures since one is a leading powder manufacturer, and one is a leading premium ammunition manufacturer. Lyman is neither.

[AJMD429]

Lots of information in this article validating numerous comments above:

http://www.realguns.com/Commentary/comar52.htm