45-120 or 50-110

buffalo bob · January 22, 2008, 09:50:30 AM

i am looking to buy a armisport 1874 sharps. i can't decide between 45-120 and 50-90 ( 50-110 when loaded heavy.) anybody have opinions on these 2 calibers. the 50 has a little more attraction because of being a "big 50 buffalo gun". they can be loaded to achieve identical velocity with 525 gr bullets. price is identical. brass is readily available for both from midway. dies easy to get.i guess its down to whether the 45 or the 50 is more accurate.

Paul Hoskins · January 22, 2008, 05:27:23 PM

buffalo bob, welcome to THL forums. I have never owned or shot a 50/90 but have shot the 45/120 quiet a bit. I never used black powder in the 45/120 but i tshould be fun. I once had a trapdoor 50/70 and loved it. It was superbly accurate. I've kicked myself ever since for selling it. Profit makes a man do goofy things tho. I would go with the 50/90 if I were in your shoes. .....Paul H

gitano · January 22, 2008, 06:07:38 PM

Welcome to THL.

I recently had a Martini-Enfield made into a .50 Alaskan, which is essentially the .50-90. So, I of course like that chambering.

I've never owned a 45-120, and in fact, I've never shot one either, but there's another "never" coming. I've never heard anybody say anything good about 'em after they got 'em, although I'm sure somebody must have. I know a 'smith that told me he has "un"-chambered more 45-120s than any other chambering. People "read" about how 'great' they are; get one or have one made; shoot it; and either sell it, hang it, or rechamber it.

Let us know what you decide, and post some pictures when you get it in your hands.

Paul

buffalo bob · January 23, 2008, 05:38:47 AM

i am not a competitive shooter, shoot for pleasure. i too have read about the downside of the 45-120 but still felt i needed more data to make a decision. the 50-90/50-110 is what i really think i will go for. can always ream to 50-140 if i get the urge later. better get a 50 cal before the liberals get into control of everything. i am new to these forums. more time on my hands since retirement. all seem very helpful and friendly.

M. R. Byrd · January 23, 2008, 06:24:31 PM

Buffalo Bob-

Welcome to THL. This is a great bunch of guys and gals.

I am not into Buffalo rifles, but I did have breakfast in buffalo camp-----

Maynard Reece
Dodge City

Paul Hoskins · January 23, 2008, 07:04:48 PM

Nice place Maynard. Looks like a good place to be in case of a tornado. .........Paul H

buffalo bob · January 24, 2008, 02:17:50 AM

reminds me of home. all the comforts that are needed. i have never had a buffalo rifle either. thought it would be a nice addition to my assortment of guns. i have become addicted to single shot falling blocks since i got my ruger #1. love that gun. 416 rigby. probably as close as i will ever get to african hunting.

gitano · January 24, 2008, 06:23:48 AM

Quotei have become addicted to single shot falling blocks since i got my ruger #1. love that gun.

You'll find a few like-minded folks here.

It may appear immodest, (there's no changing the opinion of those that have it anyway), but you might enjoy the series of threads regarding the creation of the 50 Alaskan. Here's a place to start: http://www.thehunterslife.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9329

Paul

buffalo bob · January 24, 2008, 07:55:52 AM

now another question, i have never used black powder before. from what i have read it is very corrosive. i dont really want to deal with that. i know there are substitutes. pyrodex, and 777 are most often mentioned. 777 is said to have increased "energy". can i still load it to full case capacity like black or pyrodex or the other substitutes. i dont want to ruin my new gun when i get it.

gitano · January 24, 2008, 08:21:18 AM

There are several folks here that have forgotten more about black powder shooting than I will ever know. My response should be taken in that light.

With respect to "corrosive" - I have found it necessary to be more 'religeous' about cleaning my firearms after using BP than I have with nitro-based powders. BP is a bit "messier" to clean up in my opinion, but I don't consider cleaning a firearm a chore, so 'messy' doesn't matter to me too much. By the same token, BP cleans up without all the chemicals generally used in cleaning up nitro-based powders. Water, or soapy water is all that's really needed for BP.

As for charges - true BP substitutes can be loaded just like BP. I've never used Triple 7, so you'll have to get info from someone else on that. I have used Pyrodex, and have crammed and packed it in the .50 Alaskan as much as I did true BP. Even so, it (and BP unfortunately) failed to provide muzzle velocities for 500-grain bullets above 1350 f/s at the highest. Since I really wanted 500-grain MVs in the 1650 f/s range, I had to go to smokeless charges. Still, there are smokeless powders that one can 'cram' in a 50-90 case and not risk harming the shooter or rifle.

In my opinion, BP use is about "attitude". If you want to use it for a particular reason, then "cleaning", "corrosiveness" and "velocity" aren't important issues. Using BP is probably your choice. If "C,C,&V" are important, then you probably want to use nitro-based powders.

That said, it may be that the use of BP in the .45-120 is the way to 'tame' it to reasonable recoil.

Paul

buffalo bob · January 24, 2008, 03:23:17 PM

that all makes a lot of sense. i have seen loads on reloaders nesty giving 1950fps in 50-110 with a 525gr bullet. thats smoking. probably as good as i could do with rigby. never tried a really heavy bullet in it.

gitano · January 24, 2008, 11:05:56 PM

I've had my .50 Alaskan up tp 1825 f/s with 500-grainers, and I really didn't like it. 1650 gets me "minute of buffalo" (less than 36" of vertical deflection out to 300 yds) with Northwest Custom Projectile 500-grain bullets and is pleasant to shoot. I hear of people loading .50 Alaskans to 2200 f/s wiht 500-grai bullets. That's really beastly shooting, and not for me.

Pretty much ditto with regard to MV and 500-grain bullets in my 45-70. Again, 1650 let's me shoot 'all day' and still stay on hair for anything I want to hunt out to 250 yds.

Paul

mtsharps · January 25, 2008, 10:35:33 AM

Hi Buffalo Bob

I would get the one you dream about they should shoot almost the same check the price of the brass , bullet molds and the dies that may help you to decide

I hunt with a 45-70 sharps

I have shoot pyrodex it too needs cleaning not as much as black powder I have not tried 777 right now I have gone back to shooting smokless to get higher velocities for huting (1545f/s) but I do want to try sum Pioneer powder

buffalo bob · January 25, 2008, 01:34:16 PM

yeah, i think it is going to be the 50-110. i hesitate to use bp because of the corrosiveness to the gun and brass. any brass is expensive and i dont want to have to replace it unnecessarily. as i said i am not a competitive shooter, so no rules to follow. i read some reviews on american pioneer and some said it was not consistant from load to load. dont know first hand though.

Jay Edward (deceased) · January 25, 2008, 08:57:35 PM

Quote from: buffalo bob;72851yeah, i think it is going to be the 50-110. i hesitate to use bp because of the corrosiveness to the gun and brass.

Only if you don't clean the bore or the cases. I've got rifles and cases that I've used for decades with no loss due to corrosion.

i read some reviews on american pioneer and some said it was not consistant from load to load. dont know first hand though.

Pay attention to what gitano is telling you. He loves the old big bores and the only smokeless I ever use (when I'm not using Cartridge grade blackpowder) is 4759. My rifles will stay under two inches at 100 yards when I can get my old eyes to work over the iron sights.

Sometimes I get pretty tired of the silly statements made by the 'old timers' on blackpowder, iron sights and accuracy. Roundball or cast bullet... the critters fall over when you shoot them in the right place. Saboted bullets, replacement blackpowder, scopes, slings, bolt action (so-called) muzzle loaders...

Phoooey... pretend pioneers!