I did a search and read topics on the 50 Alaskan. Bottom line...does anyone think that they are worth the cost in increased TKO Vs. a hard hitting lead cast bullet from a 45/70? The 45/70's are pretty cheap and the 50 Alaskan's are expensive enough to buy most any rifle you could desire...including African rifles.
What would you be using it for?
I live in Alaska & don't see any neeed to move beyong heavy 450 Marlin/45-70 loads.
Vance in AK.
"But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you."
If money was not a consideration a 50 would be fun, but would it kill em any deader than rhe Old Timer.
Love people and use things. NOT THE OPPOSITE.
Team ANZMO Member #00
Team 1894 Member # 214
Team Bikers Member#02
Depends on wherether you need it or just want it.
Bigger holes bleed more, and hard cast lead is not ideal when something that can hurt you needs to go down.
Then why do most dangerous game rifles shoot solids? Does solid copper kill better than hard cast lead? A fellow down the road from me killed two cape buffalo with one shot with a hard cast 45-70 bullet. What more could one want?Originally Posted by FWiedner
I'm not sure that most professional hunters consider hard-cast lead to be a true "solid". And yes, I am lead to believe that solid copper does kill better than hard-cast lead. A fellow up the road from me fired a 540 gr hammerhead from a 45-70 at 1550 fps into a cape buffalo. It broke 3 vertebrae and lost 1/2 its length and weight. He said that the 540 gr would have put the bull down by breaking the spine, but the smearing was severe. It turned downward and went into the front of the diaphram tissue, above the stomach. He then fired a 450 gr Northfork solid at 1700 fps which took out 7 vertebrae, cut between the shoulder and chest and went through the neck (head hanging down) into the face of the buffalo. Penetration around 50 inches.Originally Posted by JBledsoe
(Edited... I got a mixed up while trying to pass on information from a couple of posts from another forum. Sorry, didn't intend to pass on bad information. Hope I got it straightened out this time. )
His statement on the event was "I will personally never shoot another hardcast bullet at a thick skinned, dangerous or heavy animal."
Here's his story:
The Kodiak bullet isen't hardcast and neither is the punch bullet so why does he swear them off?? Did I miss somthing?? Didn't seem he used Garrett's heavy 550 hardcast @ 1550fps? That would have been my choice for a brain shot when all you need is max penitration. Weird
Whats with the guide and client jumping into the truck and taking off in some kind of hurry? Doesn't congradulate the client or take photos? Seems fishy to me.
The 50 sounds cool. My main reservations are if it REALLY is going to make a noticible difference and you would have a HELL of a time finding ammo for it... Of course as of others have said if you really want it that is the overruling factor....
quote: "It is always preferable to be the stomper than the stompee"
To get a true picture of mono metal or steel clad solids, you need to do some searching on forums such as accurate reloading, or 24hr. campfire. BTW Garret has quit promoting the hardcast hammerheads for game such as elephant, hippo, cape buff and rhino. Heis only reccomending his exiter ammo, for them[500 gr. Hornady steel solid].
I've done a lot pf reading on the punch bullet, and if I were ever to go back to Africa, and take my Marlin 1895, .45-70, for cape buff, I would be using the punch bullet, loaded to about 2000 fps. Here is a good read on the 50 Alaskan/punch bullet for ele.
I've got 4 45/70 levers ( 3 marlins of different barrel lengths and one is a winchester 1886) and a 50 alaskan. Most of the time I load the alaskan to 45/70 'hot loads' but if needed, I can shoot the 500 + grain bullets 400 fps faster from the same length barrel in the 50. Is it needed? Can't say, is it comforting, sometimes yes. The extra frontal area gives better shock and sectional density on the big bullets is around .3 which is optimum for good penetration. In light 300's I can get 2200fps in a 26 inch 45/70 vs 2600 fps in a 26 inch 50 alaskan.
As far as cost goes, for play I use a Lee cast 500 grain flat nose-- cost is the same as cast for a 500 grain 45/70. For serious use, Barnes, Woodleigh or Alaska Bullet works bullets all run about $1.00 a shot in either 45 or 50 caliber. From a cost standpoint, the 50 burns a bit more powder and I bought Starline cases at $94.00 a hundred when I had the gun made. The alaska may be a bit more costly to shoot, but not much. AS far as this discussion goes, I see it as the difference between the 45/70 and 50 alaskan is about the same as the difference between the 444 and 45/70. With the 45/70 being the 444 in this discussion. Do I enjoy it? Yes, so much that the 45/70s stay at home now.
"That wasn't shootin, that was killin" -- Rafe Covington