30-30 quote

Status
Not open for further replies.
I never could understand the obsession some fol]ks have with killing bears.

My father taught me that ethical hunters don't kill anything they aren't going to eat. Most folks don't eat bear meat.

I have some ethical problems with killng jiust for the sheer fun of killing.:(

Every bear hunter I know ether eats bear or gives it to someone who will.
Bear meat taste very good if it is cooled and all fat removed as soon as possible and cooked by someone who knows how to cook it.
 
Every bear hunter I know ether eats bear or gives it to someone who will.
Bear meat taste very good if it is cooled and all fat removed as soon as possible and cooked by someone who knows how to cook it.

I have no problem with that. However most bear hunters I have ever discussed it with hunts for the hide. Virtually all of the sports that kill kodiaks in Alaska leave the meat on the ground to rot.
 
This has to be one of the more ridiculous articles I have ever read regarding the 30-30 cartridge and it’s from Winchester’s own blog.
https://winchester.com/Blog/2016/05/30-30-misconceptions-through-the-years

What part or parts do you find ridiculous?[/QUOTE]

One would think Winchester would know the history of their own cartridge and how it got named the 30-30. The article is written like some Intern got the job of making up an article for their blog.

Perhaps I am too picky but that is how I see it.

By the way, are you aware of the “+Quote” icon at the bottom of each post? If you want to quote something or someone you click on the +Quote and then select “Insert quote” in the message box. Easy-peasy.
 
I, for one, cannot fathom shooting a bear unless I was being attacked. I am pretty much the same regarding other animals like cougars and such. I used to hunt deer and always brought along a sidearm in case I might be attacked by a cougar or a brown bear, but the reality was I was more afraid of encountering two legged varmints. Thankfully I never had the need for it.

I actually encountered a cougar on a deer hunt. I believe it was stocking me. I had my trusty bolt action .270 loaded with 5 rounds. My first thought wasn’t to shoot it. As a matter of fact I didn’t have a round in the chamber. I was afraid that jacking a round into the chamber might set the cougar off. And seeing as it was 25’ away from me and the only thing between us was a bush I opted to slowly back my way down the trail I came up and walk away.

This leads me back to the lever action 30-30. From then on I carried my Marlin 336 loaded with 170 grain Winchester Super-X Power Points. Why? Because I can work a lever a heckuva lot faster than a bolt and the country I was hunting in any deer encounter would be within 150 yards and most likely less than 100 yards. I had a lot more confidence in my abilities with my Marlin than I did in my bolt guns.

Want to try a humbling experience with your hunting rifle for that “just in case” bear encounter?
Bears are fast. Really fast. A bear on the move can cover 50 yards in 3. From a standing start maybe 5 seconds FROM WHAT I AM TOLD. I have only seen bears in the move in videos or heard of their speed from other hunters.

THE BEAR TEST:
Take 5 targets on stands at around a 3’ height.
The target you will aim at should be a black circle about 3” in diameter on a paper say 18”x18” or bigger. The black dot represents the nose of a bear and the height of the target is a bear’s nose if a bear is running arc on all fours.
A nose shot on a bear is on a direct path to the brain.
Place the targets at 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 yards.
Have your weapon of choice loaded with 5 rounds.
Have someone time you or set a timer for 3 seconds.
Try and shoot as many targets “in the nose” that you can in 3 seconds starting with the last target out placed at 50 yards.

The first time I tried this with both my 30-30s, my Rossi 94 in 45 Colt, my AR-15 and just for kicks my Henry Single Shot 45-70 (Utter Failure) I found I did my best with my Winchester 94 Carbine. I got 2 next to the noses of the 30 and 20 yard targets. I only got 3 rounds off and that was after lots of practice.
Very humbling experience :confused:
 
I think High Road readers would like to know that the shotgun DeYonge's dad used (and which he used, later) on the hunts he described was a double barreled 410. And I thought it was interesting that the rifle DeYonge's dad had choosen for the "just in case we see a bull moose" moment was a 30-30. I suppose some things never change. The 30-30 was enough rifle then (even though the 30.06 and 30-40 Krag were available) just as it is enough rifle now.

While the ought-six was around back before WWII, it was not widely available. Sporting rifles and it's ammo were also expensive compared to the ol' 30-30. Growiing up in the 50s, every adult I knew was a deer hunter. Not a one had a ought-six. The release of ought-six mil-surp guns and ammo after Korea seemed to be what changed the tide. Seemed by the 1970s, every one of those same guys had a ought-six or 270 in their hands and their ol 30-30 and .32 special levers were delegated to new hunters and kids. Looking back at it now, seems silly to give a gun with the high capacity of those levers, along with the difficulty it took to load and unload, and the tricky half cock safety(both of the aforementioned, were extra difficult with small hands wearing gloves/mittens or half froze from cold) to young and inexperienced hunters. Many times back then, in the pre-dawn moments before legal shooting hours, you'd hear shots and knew they were someone who had let the hammer slip while attempting to put the lever on safety after loading it when getting to stand.

Back then hunters had woodsmanship skills, so they could actually bloodtrail an animal till the 170 gr flatnose did it's job. A bangflop back then was a rarity. And yes, because of it's rainbow trajectory, iron sights and lessened power, it probably did lend itself to a considerable amount of wounded and retrieved animals. Used to be back then, it was not unusual to find a random bloodtrail in the woods. Following it was the thing to do iffin' you had a tag, since odds were there was a wounded animal at the end of it. Nowadays, with modern guns, scopes and ammo, one doesn't hardly see it anymore. I consider that a good thing. As has been said, the 30-30 was better suited for someone that was familiar with it's limitations and had the willpower to stay within those parameters. Like a .357 handgun, it is more than enough for deer, if one uses it properly and to it's potential.

One needs to remember too, that back before WWII the spruce grouse and the moose in the wilds of Alaska were less fearful of man and were easier to get close too. One can still go to northern Canada and Alaska and knock spruce grouse off the low branches of a tree with a stick. A .410 would be an excellent choice for them, creating minimal damage to the meat.
 
What part or parts do you find ridiculous?

One would think Winchester would know the history of their own cartridge and how it got named the 30-30. The article is written like some Intern got the job of making up an article for their blog.

Perhaps I am too picky but that is how I see it.

By the way, are you aware of the “+Quote” icon at the bottom of each post? If you want to quote something or someone you click on the +Quote and then select “Insert quote” in the message box. Easy-peasy.

The article/blog post accurately describes how the 30 WCF became widely known as the 30-30. Either the intern was smart or the editor was.
 
I have no problem with that. However most bear hunters I have ever discussed it with hunts for the hide. Virtually all of the sports that kill kodiaks in Alaska leave the meat on the ground to rot.

Bear hunters in you area seem to be different than my area as far as eating the bear meat.
I don't know anyone that has hunted Grizzly bear so I can't say anything about that.
 
What part or parts do you find ridiculous?

One would think Winchester would know the history of their own cartridge and how it got named the 30-30. The article is written like some Intern got the job of making up an article for their blog.

Perhaps I am too picky but that is how I see it.

By the way, are you aware of the “+Quote” icon at the bottom of each post? If you want to quote something or someone you click on the +Quote and then select “Insert quote” in the message box. Easy-peasy.[/QUOTE]

I see nothing in the article that would make you say that, perhaps you're seeing something I'm missing.
Yes I'm aware of the "quote" icon, how do you think I quoted your post?
Maybe my deleting most of your post that had nothing to do with my question confused you.
 
Looking back at it now, seems silly to give a gun with the high capacity of those levers, along with the difficulty it took to load and unload, and the tricky half cock safety(both of the aforementioned, were extra difficult with small hands wearing gloves/mittens or half froze from cold) to young and inexperienced hunters. Many times back then, in the pre-dawn moments before legal shooting hours, you'd hear shots and knew they were someone who had let the hammer slip while attempting to put the lever on safety after loading it when getting to stand.

I talked to a young man, who was with me in the Doctor's waiting room with his wife and pre school son. The young man told me of borrowing a 30-30 Win, and I think it was a Marlin, and going into the deep dark woods before daybreak. He had chambered a round and lowered the hammer all the way down. That mode of carry is not unusual for those who are used to H&R Topper shotguns with their external hammer and transfer bar. I carried my Topper hammer down.

GTJ7czY.jpg

7wXP4rM.jpg

He was marking the trail with reflective tape, the Marlin was slung over one shoulder, muzzle up. He leaned over to tie some tape and his equipment bag swung around and hit the hammer. As this was a pre push safety Marlin, all that energy was transferred directly through the firing pin to the primer, and the round went off. The bullet barely cleared his head and he lost most of his hearing in one ear. If that muzzle was just a little more in the direction of his skull, his son would have been an orphan.
 
I consider the 30-30 to be one of those old, respected, and venerable cartridges. Not many people in my family have firearms, my grandfather is one exception. He has 3 rifles that few in the family know about let alone have seen. One of them is a Marlin 1936 in 30-30. First and only time he showed me that rifle I was 11 years old. 10 or 12 years after that I got a Marlin 336 that looks just like his in 35 Remington. I still have my rifle and he still has his 30-30. And maybe some day I will have both when he passes on.

And I would not feel ill equipped hunting with either the 35 or 30-30.
 
I have a little Savage 23C in 25-20. I have always wondered how it would do on game larger than, say, a raccoon or a possum. I reload for it using a 60 gr Hornady JSP flat point. Pushed by 12 gr of 4227 IIRC. I think it gets around 2200 FPS, again, going on memory. I know it will put a bullet completely through a treated lumber 4X4 and in inch into the next one.

Last fall I had the opportunity to shoot an enormous 14 pound beef roast before it was cut into smaller roasts. Long story short, the bullet completely penetrated 12" of roast and buried itself in the mud, where it was recovered, having mushroomed perfectly. It weighed 56 grains.

So is it a deer rifle? I don't think so. But it could do the job, I think, if called upon.

At the dawn of smokless powder sporting cartridges, the 30-30 was considered adequate for anything up to and including bears. And the 35 Remington, why, that was the hammer of THOR!

I don't think the game animals have gotten any harder to kill.

Don't forget the James Jordan buck in 1914 that was taken with a .25-20. The Jordan Buck measures 206 1/8 net typical points and locals estimated it weighed close to 400 pounds (must have eaten a lot of those deep fried Wisconsin cheese curds).
 
History has proven the 30-30 Winchester is a more than adequate woods deer rifle. I own two, a Marlin 30A lever action and a Springfield 840 bolt action. Both rifles will print 1 1/4 inch or better at 100 yards with my loads at the range off a bench. I've never hunted with either rifle but nephews and grand sons use them every deer season and have taken many whitetails with them. hdbiker
 
Read somewhere that the Inuit mostly hunted with .223 Rem. Including use on Polar bear. Shot placement being the critical factor as well as proper distance (both to the bear and to the snowmobile I suspect)
 
30-30 is a dying round today because everyone is busy comparing the ballistics chart on the computer and not out killing stuff to compare.

You’ll notice they used to engineer cartridges for hunting, now days it’s all about accuracy down range. Blunt tip bullets, lead alloys vs high BC, skinny bullets. Anything that comes out today for a specific hunting purpose gets torn to shreds because it won’t shoot MOA at 800 yards.

All the old hunting rounds do very well at their intended range. I’ll take the 30-30 over a 6.5 cm for under 100 yards killing wild hogs any day. 30-30 was designed to kill game at 100 yards, the CM designed to put holes in paper at 800. What’s extra funny is I have chased killing hogs with 300 blk for a few years. Tried all the new bullets, stumbled across some old Speer 130gr hollow points in my father in laws stash, and just like that the pigs go down Drt. He was loading them in 30-30 for varmints back in the day. Big hollow point protected the primers. It’s shaped like a standard 150gr LRN, but has a nasty hollow point drilled in it.

When I first started casting I did it because it was cheap. We went mule deer hunting (muzzle loader season) with some big pure lead maxi balls I cast and it was magical. Tried cast for hunting in my other large calibers and was like why on earth are we using jackets for low speed big bores? Because all people do to research is look on the computer.
 
I have no problem with that. However most bear hunters I have ever discussed it with hunts for the hide. Virtually all of the sports that kill kodiaks in Alaska leave the meat on the ground to rot.
To me the term hunter is an honorific that implies someone with woodcraft, respect for the environment and one who doesn't trophy hunt. Have no issue with someone who has a mounted deer head who can tell you the various ways he cooked/roasted/bbq'd, etc the animal.
Anyone who trophy hunts, and just taking the hide and leaving the rest is trophy hunting in my book, deserves to see if he can outrun one of those bears in a footrace when his rifle jammed.
 
800 yards isn’t hunting. 300 yards “might” be depending where you are and the animal you’re hunting. If your prey can’t see, smell, or hear you, you’re killing, not hunting. For hunting, the 30-30 can get it done if you do your part. Many people aren’t willing to hunt. They just want the animal down. Hunting (to me) is determined by your skill to maneuver the terrain you’re in and your ability to get close. And there’s only two animals in NA that I wouldn’t feel completely comfortable hunting with a 30-30....from the ground. One is white, one is brown.
 
800 yards isn’t hunting. 300 yards “might” be depending where you are and the animal you’re hunting. If your prey can’t see, smell, or hear you, you’re killing, not hunting. For hunting, the 30-30 can get it done if you do your part. Many people aren’t willing to hunt. They just want the animal down. Hunting (to me) is determined by your skill to maneuver the terrain you’re in and your ability to get close. And there’s only two animals in NA that I wouldn’t feel completely comfortable hunting with a 30-30....from the ground. One is white, one is brown.
This is what I was saying, hunting implies involving woodcraft to me. A hearkening back to Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, etc. I have never hunted the 'Glades from an airboat or swamp buggy, just doesn't appeal. If you can't get close enough for a .44 Marlin lever with open irons to take your game, you don't deserve it to my mind.
Not knocking those that do hunt that way, but the appeal is the chase as much as the harvesting. Out of season I've been known to hunt with my trusty camera. Almost as satisfying getting close enough to capture pictures as harvesting some venison. Almost.
 
I have never owned a 30-30 but I am quite sure that it is a perfectly capable hunting round in the hands of average hunting talent. Anyone with hunting experience and average ballistics prowess will acknowledge that a 30-30 will do the job. I have never understood the my caliber is better than your caliber exchanges; at some strange boundary of cartridge performance, the chest cavity of a moose, elk, deer, etc somehow transform into armored transport - ribs turn to steel, lungs turn to Kevlar - I just do not get that perspective. If one prefers a caliber or rifle style, then use it and be proud of your choice but know that there are a zillion other choices/ combos that will do the job with like required results. A centerfire round in the boiler room from a 30-30 is, as with many other calibers, plenty of horsepower. Madness I tell you, madness!
 
I have never owned a 30-30 but I am quite sure that it is a perfectly capable hunting round in the hands of average hunting talent. Anyone with hunting experience and average ballistics prowess will acknowledge that a 30-30 will do the job. I have never understood the my caliber is better than your caliber exchanges; at some strange boundary of cartridge performance, the chest cavity of a moose, elk, deer, etc somehow transform into armored transport - ribs turn to steel, lungs turn to Kevlar - I just do not get that perspective. If one prefers a caliber or rifle style, then use it and be proud of your choice but know that there are a zillion other choices/ combos that will do the job with like required results. A centerfire round in the boiler room from a 30-30 is, as with many other calibers, plenty of horsepower. Madness I tell you, madness!

Was hunting with a friend in upstate NY, he loaned me his 30-30 and took his old '06. As usual our luck was pretty much Casey at the bat's luck.
While we were hiking (can you call it hunting when you don't bag anything?) we came upon this guy with a bolt action rifle that seemed to have a larger ejection port and muzzle opening. Asked him what he was hunting (deer season) with and he said .458. Felt like asking him if he was hoping for a chest shot to both kill and field dress the animal simultaneously.
 
I’m not much of a hunter, I’m more of a kill stuff that causes trouble kinda guy. Feed my corn to the cow I’m gonna eat instead. I may shoot a deer for jerkey now and then, but usually it’s easier to just let’s friends with a hard on for shooting deer thin them down.

hunting is a double edged sword for the small town economy, I don’t care how you take a deer as long as one leaves!
 
If you can't get close enough for a .44 Marlin lever with open irons to take your game, you don't deserve it to my mind.
As someone who primarily hunts with a Marlin 44 Mag, I think your statement can be taken to literally. The guy who hunts the plains, “might” find it exceptionally difficult to get within 100-150 yards of a pronghorn, elk, or even whitetail. I’m fairly sure I would. Because I’m a hill hunter. I use trees, boulders, and brush to my advantage. There’s very little of that on the plains. Having said that, had I grown up hunting the plains, I might not find it as difficult.
 
As someone who primarily hunts with a Marlin 44 Mag, I think your statement can be taken to literally. The guy who hunts the plains, “might” find it exceptionally difficult to get within 100-150 yards of a pronghorn, elk, or even whitetail. I’m fairly sure I would. Because I’m a hill hunter. I use trees, boulders, and brush to my advantage. There’s very little of that on the plains. Having said that, had I grown up hunting the plains, I might not find it as difficult.
Point well taken. I'm an Eastern boy and so my perspective is eastern woods hunting. The boys West of the Big Muddy have to hunt a whole different way, not taking anything away from them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top