30-30 and Dinner question..

[twoblink]

I often read in gun rags about "more deer has been taken with a 30-30 than we can count" blah blah blah..

First, a few rags claim the 30-30 has killed more deer than any other round.. Is that true or even close to true? What about 30'06 and 270?

Second, what's the largest "animal" I can reasonably put on the dinner table with a 30-30?

I'm asking because looking at some of the bullet specs; some loads like the 357Mag out of a rifle will meet/beat 30-30 specs.. but I'm not sure what 30-30 specs will kill...

 

[ACP230]

I know people who have taken black bear with the .30-30.

I'd feel comfortable using it on game up to that size.
Shot placement means a lot, of course.

 

[treeprof]

I s'pose its 1) relatively old-age, 2) enduring popularity and 3) tendency to be used primarily to take deer and not other game, gives some credence to the "more deer than any other" notion. I have never seen any hard data to that effect, tho. Stories abound abt it being used to take all kinds of N Am game at all kinds of distances. But beyond deer, IMO, it's suitable for black bear @ 100 yds or so, elk at some distance thereabouts or less, and any critter smaller than deer at deer+ ranges. It was thought to be the cat's meow for all kinds of game when it was introduced, b/c it did offer significant ballistic improvements over the black powder cartridges of its day.

 

[Art Eatman]

A corrolary statement is that the .30-30 has crippled and lost more deer than any other cartridge, as well. Consider the rather coarse iron sights, the trajectory, and the propensity for many hunters to wrongly estimate the range...

If one practices and learns the proper sighting, and limits shots to around 150 yards, there's not a thing wrong with the .30-30 for most hunting.

Art

 

[saddlebum]

in my neck of the woods i would think 22lr has killed more deer than anything else. saddlebum

 

[mustanger98]

My Daddy has always favored a scoped (fixed power 4X) .30-30 and I've seen deer he's killed with it. He's always advised me to take them at close range if possible and make one shot count.

Ballistically, Elmer Keith didn't favor .30-30 at all because he was dealing with elk and mule deer out to 400yds in Montana and then Idaho. However, when he was hunting Texas whitetails within 100yds at a seminar, he said the .30-30 would have been more efficient than the .260Remington (IIRC, or it might have been the .280, I'd have to look back at "Hell, I Was There") they were introducing at the time.

Consider the rather coarse iron sights, the trajectory, and the propensity for many hunters to wrongly estimate the range...

Tell you what I did with my Winchester .30-30; I took the rear sight off the barrel and replaced it with a Lyman #2 tang sight. I get much better groups on the 100yd line now because I can actually see the sights.

For the exact numbers, I'll have to look back at the tables in Hornady's 5th Edition load manual Volume 2, but the trajectory ain't that bad out to 150-200yds. I'd say it's more user error than actual trajectory- they don't know the trajectory and exact range so they use too much holdover, or not enough. This is true of too many hunters using any rifle/cartridge. I think it's mostly that there's just so many .30-30s out there. It's a great rifle/cartridge. It gets praised and cussed for obvious reasons then- either somebody used their's to good effect or failed miserably with it.

 

[twoblink]

I've noticed that the word "deer" is like bambi whitetails to bullmoose and everything in between. Perhaps that's the problem, the word has a +- 300lb margain of error.

At this point, under 100 yards, I think the 30-30 is just fine...

My friend's dad has the "If you can't drag the dead animal by yourself, then you shouldn't try to kill it with a 30-30 rule", is that a good rule?

 

[mustanger98]

I've noticed that the word "deer" is like bambi whitetails to bullmoose and everything in between. Perhaps that's the problem, the word has a +- 300lb margain of error.

That's about right. But in my part of the country- SE US- the deer range from 100lbs to 225lbs. A .30-30 is generally adequate. If you go to areas where the whitetails are bigger or you're dealing with mule deer, you might better get something a mite bigger, especially if you have to reach out 300-400yds. This is what I was saying about Elmer Keith not favoring it.

Where I hunt, I have no mental problem with a 75-100yd shot from standing or a 150yd shot from a decent rest.

My friend's dad has the "If you can't drag the dead animal by yourself, then you shouldn't try to kill it with a 30-30 rule", is that a good rule?

Depending on an individual's strength, that may be about right. Really, if somebody hunts alone, they need to consider what size animal they can handle alone. Not only do they not need for it to run off where they can't recover it, they also don't need to get overworked and wind up leaving it laying there to waste. If they can't handle it, they shouldn't hunt it, but that's a little different issue.

 

[charles webb]

my friend went hunting in africa and took an elephant with 2 shots
and ive bagged an elk at 215 yards with open sights
and my dad shot a grizzly bear and took it down in 1 shot(he was a marksman in army) so i believe that the 30-30 is the best round out next to the 3-06

 

[Mannlicher]

While I don't often differ in opinion with Art, I do on this one. It has been my experience, that the 30/30 rifleman usually does hunt short range, does take a careful shot, and as a consequence, does kill his animal with little waste.
I have not seen a lot of wasted animals with a 30/30

 

[DigMe]

my friend went hunting in africa and took an elephant with 2 shots

I'm surprised that the guide let him use a .30-30 to shoot an elephant. That's pretty hard to swallow but if you know him as a trustworthy, no BS guy then I'll take your word for it.

brad cook

 

[Dave McCracken]

In MD, the average shot is well within 100 yards. The 30-30 users I know have lots of dead deer behind them, and few cripples.

For Eastern deer hunting under these conditions, the 30-30 is just enough. Mine has had some accurizing, a trigger job, and a Lyman peep sight. Bench groups fall under 3" at 100 yards.

It'll do the job if I do mine.

 

[1911Tuner]

Thutty-Thutty

The 30-30 has probably not only taken more deer than the
.270 and the old "ought-six"...it's probably taken more than the two
combined. The Model 94 WInchester alone has probably done that.

The reason is simple...There a blue million of'em out there. The M-94
was always readily available in nearly every hardware and feed store
in America at one time or another, and it was affordable by all except the
most destitute...and even then, used rifles went for half the cost of new ones. I can remember when new Winchesters retailed for less than 75 bucks. Even though that was a lot more money then than it is now,
the rifles were still proportionally far less expensive than even a Savage.

The 30-06 is nipping at the old lever gun's heels though...and the reason is
the same. Huge volumes of surplus rifles were cheap, and they were available everywhere. No tellin' how many collectible '03 Springfields were hacked up during the "Sporterizing" process...

Been a lotta game crippled by the 30-30...and the reasons are the same for
those than with all other calibers...Poor shot placement, and/or taking the
shots at insane ranges that were far beyond the capability of the rifle and the hunter. As long as the ranges are reasonable...about 150 yards...and
the shot is good, the 30-30 is a good caliber for game up to about 400 pounds.

 

[Alfadog]

No tellin' how many collectible '03 Springfields were hacked up during the "Sporterizing" process...

But if so many of them had not been hacked up, would the unmodified ones still be as collectible?

 

[mondocomputerman]

The 30-30 has been around longer than the 30.06. I've killed all of my deer with a Marlin 30-30.

 

[mustanger98]

Knowing the Winchester 1894 and .30-30 were introduced in 1894, now I'm trying to remember the evolution of the Marlin 336. I seem to recall Model 36 from an article, but I think it was renamed that in 1936 from another designation.

 

[treeprof]

The 336 is the round bolt successor to the square bolt 36 (change occured in the late 1940's); the original was the model 1893. It was chambered in .30-30 not long after the cartridge was introduced. I don't recall the original 1893 chamberings.

 

[JeremyIA]

Teddy Roosevelt killed a bison with a .30-30. The cartridge is capable if the hunter is too.

 

[countertop]

Winchester has sold well over 4 million Model 94s. Until recently (last 20-30 years) I would bet the vast vast majority of them were in 30-30.

Marlin has sold well over 3 million 336, model 36, 1893s. Again, until relatively recently, the vast vast majority of them were, and continue to be, in 30-30.

No other round comes close.

 

[mustanger98]

Winchester has sold well over 4 million Model 94s.

Well, mine is in the 5million serial# range. When Sheriff Jim Wilson wrote his article on the Winchester '94 he gave an estimate of just over 7million. That was last year and I'd about bet it's closer to 8million by now.

Until recently (last 20-30 years) I would bet the vast vast majority of them were in 30-30.

I'd about make that same bet as '94 still tend to be more affordable than others and .30-30 ammo is still a commonly stocked item in most places.

Used to be, Marlin's 336 and Winchester's '94, both in .30-30, sat side by side in most gun shops, hardware stores and department stores, buyer's choice for $79.95.

Kind of off topic for the hunting forum, but on 9/11 this one store in my area- the sporting goods manager told me the ammo they sold the most of and by the case was .30-30Winchester. That started about 15 minutes after the first plane hit.