.405 Winchester ?

[Ramrod]

Fact is he couldn't kill anything very large with the .405 without multiple hits, it's a pretty crappy round. But he killed alot of Big Game with some very primative jacketed bullets in the .450 at what is considered a pretty low velocity by the modern "Premiuim" bullet crowd. Life can get pretty expensive for the "internet hunter".

[quickdtoo]

I have an H&R Target in .405 Winchester, it shoots the 300gr Hornady SP Interlocks at 2435fps, Sierra Infinity shows a ME of 3949fp which is in line with data from other sources. I wouldn't describe that as a crappy round. I think the only thing TR had problems with were crappy bullets.

Tim

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_No1_405.htm

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ammunition/bully_041805/

[Ramrod]

I don't have any problem launching 300 grain bullets at over 2600 fps from my .375, and  I know for a fact it's a beter killer than any .405, .450 Marlin. or any hot loaded .45-70.

[quickdtoo]

And your point is??? Since this thread is about the .405 Winchester, who cares what the .375 does!

Tim

[Ramrod]

The point is there are many better rounds out there than the .405! It was a failure 100 years ago, Teddy or not, and it's still worthless. Sorry if you can't see what everyone else has seen for over 100 years.

[dave hall]

No reason for a lot of cartridges,but there still out there.Companys try bringing them back every year,Dave.

[Redhawk1]

The point is there are many better rounds out there than the .405! It was a failure 100 years ago, Teddy or not, and it's still worthless. Sorry if you can't see what everyone else has seen for over 100 years.

I would not say the 405 is worthless, it is a very good round with the proper load and bullet.  To say a 405 is worthless is like saying the 45-70 , 450 Marlin and 444 Marlin are worthless. Which none of them are.

I shoot a 416 Rigby and find no need for a 375 H&H, but that does not make the 375 H&H worthless.

So lets try to keep to the topic here.

[Ramrod]

Has anybody had any experience with the .405 Winchester ?
Opinions on the caliber ?

Redhawk> This was the original post. I gave "my" opinion. If that's not sticking to the topic please tell me what is.

[Redhawk1]

Has anybody had any experience with the .405 Winchester ?
Opinions on the caliber ?

Redhawk> This was the original post. I gave "my" opinion. If that's not sticking to the topic please tell me what is.

OK, what if any experience have you had with the 405

[Ramrod]

Randy,oops, I mean Redhawk>I won't have any more replies here as long as you use your moderator power to delete the parts of my post that you don't like. I didn't see any violation of the rules. You just censor people that you don't agree with.

[Redhawk1]

Randy,oops, I mean Redhawk>I won't have any more replies here as long as you use your moderator power to delete the parts of my post that you don't like. I didn't see any violation of the rules. You just censor people that you don't agree with.

I just deleted your comment that was in poor taste. I have never had to use my position to ever have to censor anyone, I just felt your comment was inappropriate. If you have a problem, you can take it up with Graybeard. I am sure he would of found your comment  inappropriate also.  Just as I think your Randy comment is uncalled for but not something I would not delete.

Have a nice day.

[quickdtoo]

Ramrod, your deleted comment was rude and inappropriate, not the kind of language that is acceptable here, it would be nice if you could make your point as a gentleman without resorting to that sort of response, if you can't, perhaps GBO isn't a good place for you to visit. Disguising language that is not allowed on GBO is no more acceptable than using the original spelling.

Tim

[walkingwolf]

   I Have a ruger #1 405.  Got my deer with it. Out of the box 100 yrds. 3 shoots 1 3/16" group.

[Redhawk1]

Well after this thread, I had to see what all the fuss over the 405 Win was about, I bought a Encore Barrel in 405 Win. I have brass and 300 gr. hard cast bullets to load up and go to the range.

[mcwoodduck]

Depending on the action you can do a whole lot with either the .405 or the .45-70.  Factory loads are real similar with 300 grain bullets.  I think the 405 would have better penetration with the slightly longer bullet.  But most shops have a box of .45-70 somewhere.
In an episode of Tracks across Africa Craig Boddington had a Ruger No.1 H in .405 for his daughter and had Hornady load up some loads that equal 400 Jefferies in power with 400 grain bullets.  They called it the 405 Britney Boddington load.  I think you can order them from Hornady.
The .45-70 can be loaded to the bottom end of 458 Win Mag in the right action.  I have a Siamese that I had re barreled that can handle it.  Soon it will have a stock and I can use it.  Wjhile the action in the No. 1 can handle the pressure of a 458 loaded 45-70 the case can not and would not try it.  The warm rounds I have for the 1895 marlin would make the trapdoor, I also own, into a single time auto ejector.  That's why I do not take them to the range at the same time.
If you have anything other than the No.1 you may want to stay in the factory specs for the 405 big medicine.
TR called his Winchester 95 in .405 Big Medicine.

[StrawHat]

I read somewhere that one of the reasons the 405 was not more popular is it was considered overpowered for everything in North America.  Finding that article will be difficult as I read it back in the 60's.

Hard to believe it  had that much power.  Good thing game is so much tougher now a days.

I have a Winchester M1895 so chambered, complete with the fearsome rifle butt plate.  Recoil is noticable but not that fearsome.

I now hand load for it with the Lyman 330 grain bullet.  It works well on deer.  Have not used it on larger game.

Also had a Siamese Mauser.

I posted somewhere about my foolproof method of handloading so I would never use the wrong load in the wrong rifle.  Then I watched as a friend loaded one of my Siamese loads in a trapdoor or rolling block.  I stopped him before he squeezed off but it cured me of loading hotter than the weakest action I owned would tolerate.

405 better than a 45-70?  Kind of like apples and oranges in my opinion.

[mcwoodduck]

You talk about over powered.  I was reading a book that was a compilation of hunting stories.  One was about these two guys going to Greenland with the new .300 in search of Polar Bear and how they had drawn tags for the museum collection.   The article touts the great power and range of the new .300. I'm thinking that the trip was in the mid to late 50's and the .300 was 300Win Mag... Wrong they then mentioned the Model 99's and the rotary mag.  Holly cow these guys are going after polar bear with a .300 Savage.  A 100+ feet per second slower than the .308.  the year was 1913 by the way.  So when you look at .30-30 .32 Win Spl. and the whole line of Win auto brush rifles the .405 looks like an elephant gun.  With a modern single shot it could be.
I know this is off topic but.
I think the .405 went dormant for a while due to the availability of .45-70 and the same time the addition of the fast 30's in the same model 95.  That could be ordered in .30-40 Krag and .30-06 plus a number of others potent calibers.
I wish Ruger would also offer it in the No 1 S like the .45-70 and the 9.3X72R.   

[StrawHat]

The 405 never got a good start.

About the time it went south a lot of lever guns were taking a beating.  Lots of soldiers were coming home and had just experienced the best the US had to offer, the Springfield 1903 and Enfield P17.

Also the fantastic Mauser M98 and SMLE.

The flatter trajectory and increased power in a lighter more compact pack may have had more than a bit role in pushing the 405 to the back burner.

While the 45-70 did not suffer the same fate it was not treated kindly by the gun press or the gun buying public.  As is so often the case, the newest, biggest, mostest... etc got the lion share of the publicity and the old tried and trues got left behind.  Until the depression when finding a new gun was a chore not many could afford.

Just finding ammo was a blessing and people bought any ammo they found. If the had a gun so chambered, great.  If not, it became trading material when the right stuff was found.

Anyway, as the new stuff was introduced the old just got pushed aside.  It happened to the 45-70 and the 50-70 before it.  The 300 Savage spoken about by mcwoodduck is today an endangered species and there are a bunch more, if you believe the writers.

Enough rambling, if you have one of the older rifles chambered for a classic cartridge you know what it is like to be content.  If not, have fun chasing the next fastest, bestest, mostest. 

There is enough of both to keep everyone happy.

[One Eye]

The point is there are many better rounds out there than the .405! It was a failure 100 years ago, Teddy or not, and it's still worthless. Sorry if you can't see what everyone else has seen for over 100 years.

I am a huge Teddy Roosevelt fan, but the truth is that he was a horrible shot due to terrible eyesight.  The cartridge was not a failure 100 years ago, nor is it a failure today.  The only failure is shooters not knowing enough about their weapons.  I could find lots of faults with every cartridge out there.  When you say "failure", you really mean that you do not "like" it, right?

I am looking for a Winchester 1895 in .405 myself right now.  Looking for the nostalgic feeling 

Dan