.30-30 for elk?

[AKElroy]

I have never hunted elk, but I have hunted all South Texas has to offer most my life. Since most of that has been with scoped .270's & 7 mags, I was always in the camp of using too much gun. My Grandad always filled his tag (as if he ever bought a license) with his 94, and I always marveled in my youthful ignorance at the thought of a .30-30 actually taking a puny 90 lb deer cleanly. Just could not be possible. After getting some actual grown-up experience taking a nice cull buck with a borrowed 94, I began the search for a clean 94. Now for the "widow at church" story---Her husband passed away 30 years ago, having never shot his 1960-ish 94. I asked her if $275.00 sounded fair & she jumped at it. First deer taken with it was a decent 90 lb doe offhand @ 140 paces. Broke her neck cleanly. The great things about this gun in 1894 are the same great things about it today. You can always have it with you, it is as light as a stick, it points where you want to shoot & sends rounds to that spot, and it re-loads like lightening. I would LOVE to take it elk hunting--That would be an awesome experience. Choose the right load, get very familiar gauging distance & hitting at those ranges, and enjoy the experience of a lifetime. It is MORE than enough gun, any distance limitations will only serve to make you do your part as a hunter. If you do flub a shot, it is comforting to have a near instant follow-up while barley changing your sight picture.

 

[Demitrios]

I gave MAELSTROM a few sheets of 1/8th inch thick galvanized steel. He cut out 8 silhouettes and stacked them onto a half inch thick piece of plywood. His 30-30 still went through it, now I understand that Elk is not stacks of galvanized steel and the bullets will do different things to both targets but I think it's safe to say that it'll do the trick.

 

[jmorris]

Quote:
If you hang around here long enough you’ll find someone that’s killed a water buffalo with a squirt gun; however, a 30-30 is a little on the small side for Elk IMO.

Huh??? Why??

One can cite numerous accounts of how well the .223 has dispatched deer sized (+) game (and it can) and we all know that the 30-06 has killed everything that has been roaming the earth since its existence. The fact remains that a .177 pellet rifle shot CAN kill anything but how good are your feet (more importantly, how good is your shot placement). The only thing that can replace marksmanship is a really tall cliff and a lot of people. I am (or my feet are) of the opinion that there is no such thing as too dead. I didn’t mean to take anything away from the 30-30 (I even have one somewhere).

Why can't, for once, someone start a 460 WBY mag for rabbit thread?

 

[Art Eatman]

Look: The whole deal is the hunter's skill as a shooter--as well as his hunting skills.

The only real drawback to the .30-30 has little to do with the cartridge. It's the fact that the sights are not of the best, and many shooters can't shoot accurately beyond 100 to 150 yards. A buckhorn sight mounted out on the barrel is not a precision instrument. Some folks do okay; some don't.

 

[Harve Curry]

American Indians still use a Winchester 30-30 around here for elk and everythng else, it's a all around rifle still.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Well, I dunno about you guys, but I find that a water/squirt RIFLE to feel like I'm cheating when it comes to large bull African Elephants - I prefer the challenge of a squirt PISTOL - but hey, that's just me. My backup sidearm for defense against a charge is a spitwad & straw from Sonic, in a strongside holster.

 

[mljdeckard]

I'm completely with armedbear.

I look at it this way. If a 30-30 is the ballistic twin of 7.62x39, why not use my SKS for elk? I could do it, but it certainly wouldn't be the first bat I would bring to this ballgame.

I currently use .270 for all big game hunting, but if I were more serious about hunting elk, I would probably get a 7 mag. (I may HAVE to. The elk seem to be pushing more and more into deer territory.)

 

[Harve Curry]

If the bow and arrow that is used for deer can be used on elk, then why not the venerable 30-30? It's the hunter, shot placement, and the range.

 

[ArmedBear]

The OP asked "in terms of stopping power."

That, in itself, makes comparisons to archery irrelevant.

It also means that he is not asking, "Will the elk, when shot with a .30-30, eventually die?"

It seems that, no matter what, any question about the use of a marginal caliber for hunting a given animal will get a series of answers that say it's plenty and that proper skill is all that matters. The more extreme seem to imply that anything more than a .22LR is just "magnumitis."

I don't think you'll find, say, a really experienced hunter and guide -- someone who has seen a lot of elk shot -- who will say that skill doesn't matter. However, I sincerely doubt that you'll find one who says that the bullet and caliber chosen don't matter.

If the answer is always, "Sure! That's PLENTY!" then we should just make it a sticky.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

If you've never hunted elk, why handicap yourself?

Someone who has taken dozens of elk, knows elk hunting and his hunting territory, and can shrug his shoulders and turn away from a less than perfect shot can certainly use a .30-30.

But a man who has never killed elk, and who might be tempted to take a difficult shot as his "only chance" would be better served with something like a .30-06 with a premium bullet, or a 7mm Rem Mag -- again with a heavy premium bullet.

 

[ArmedBear]

I always marveled in my youthful ignorance at the thought of a .30-30 actually taking a puny 90 lb deer cleanly. Just could not be possible.

No offense, but a deer that weighs under 100 lbs. has little to do with an elk, other than that they're both 4-legged herbivores. At least in Idaho, elk [strike]bucks[/strike] bulls can be more than 10 TIMES that size.

http://imnh.isu.edu/digitalatlas/bio/mammal/Hoofed/elk/elkfrm.htm

Elk, for hunting purposes, is not just a somewhat taller, stouter deer. It's a larger animal, by an order of magnitude.

To put it another way, a large jackrabbit compares to a 90 lb. deer, as that deer compares to a [strike]buck[/strike] bull elk.

The size range of Rocky Mountain Elk overlaps with North American Bison (450-1000+ lbs. vs. 850-2200 lbs.).

Just food for thought...

 

[Vern Humphrey]

No offense, but a deer that weighs under 100 lbs. has little to do with an elk, other than that they're both 4-legged herbivores. At least in Idaho, elk bucks can be more than 10 TIMES that size.

And in my experience, you want to break bone when you shoot an elk -- because a wounded elk will go places that will leave you with a lung-busting job to pack out his carcass.

So I say, choose a cartridge and bullet that can break large, heavy bones and plow on to the vitals.

 

[mljdeckard]

I agree. My dad happened on a party this fall that had wounded an elk. We tried to track it for two days. They caught a glimpse of it on a hilltop, but couldn't get a shot at it. I heard somewhere that elk have a lot more exterior body fat, and very commonly, if you don't get a critical hit, they will bleed slowly.

 

[swiftak]

I know a guy that killed his moose in NH with a 30-30. I would use mine to kill a moose or an elk. Like a couple of the guys said, be resonable with the ranges.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

My dad happened on a party this fall that had wounded an elk. We tried to track it for two days. They caught a glimpse of it on a hilltop, but couldn't get a shot at it. I heard somewhere that elk have a lot more exterior body fat, and very commonly, if you don't get a critical hit, they will bleed slowly.

Not only that, they will head for some of the most god-awful terrain you ever saw.

I once tracked a small band of elk (none of them wounded, thank heavens) until they started slabbing on a steep icy slope. I realized I couldn't possibly keep my footing following them, and if I slipped, I'd fall and slide a couple of hundred feet or so.

Going where a wounded elk will go, then packing out the meat, antlers and hide is a gut-wrenching job.

 

[ArmedBear]

LOL

BULL elk. Not "buck elk."

That's what happens when I look through a bunch of DFG lit, type up something quick and leave the office.

 

[saturno_v]

If a 30-30 is the ballistic twin of 7.62x39, why not use my SKS for elk? I could do it, but it certainly wouldn't be the first bat I would bring to this ballgame.

Because the 7.62 X 39 and the 30-30 are not ballistic twins (at least up to 100 yards or even a bit more)...that's why....I cannot believe this nonsense is still around...

Careful handloading bring a 170 gr, 30-30 bullet well over 2000 ft/lb territory....a 123 gr 7.62 X 39 is a 1500-1600 ft/lb round at best...more power, heavier bullet, more SD for the 30-30

The OP asked "in terms of stopping power."

That, in itself, makes comparisons to archery irrelevant.

It also means that he is not asking, "Will the elk, when shot with a .30-30, eventually die?"

It seems that, no matter what, any question about the use of a marginal caliber for hunting a given animal will get a series of answers that say it's plenty and that proper skill is all that matters. The more extreme seem to imply that anything more than a .22LR is just "magnumitis."

I don't think you'll find, say, a really experienced hunter and guide -- someone who has seen a lot of elk shot -- who will say that skill doesn't matter. However, I sincerely doubt that you'll find one who says that the bullet and caliber chosen don't matter.

If the answer is always, "Sure! That's PLENTY!" then we should just make it a sticky.

While is true that the venerable 30 WCF is on the light side for Elk you cannot deny that there are people nowdays that consider a 300 Win Mag the minimum for whitetail...

The fact that anbything above 22 LR is considered by some "magnumitis" it's a gross exaggeration.....of course you need some minimum power to get the job done and nobody would advocate a 223 for elk...

That said the 30-30 is not a pop gun especially within 100-150 yards.....it's always the same story....there are guys that feel well protected with a 454 Casull revolver against a grizzly but consider the 30-30 marginal on deer...go figure!!!

 

[ArmedBear]

nobody would advocate a 223 for elk...

I'm surprised you wouldn't. You can push it above 1400 ft-lbs.

BTW do people imagine that elk hunting involves an animal that stands still at 50 yards and waits for you to get a perfect shot?

Elk, for all their heft, run like deer. But they don't freeze like deer. They just run. And they live in the mountains. Not "mountains" like in the East, but actual mountains, like 12,000 foot mountains, with a lot of steep slopes, deep canyons, and cliffs.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

Because the 7.62 X 39 and the 30-30 are not ballistic twins (at least up to 100 yards or even a bit more)...that's why

Not only that, but slug construction is WILDLY different. The last thing you want on on elk is a slug that is designed to fragment and tumble on impact..........

IF I were to hunt an elk with 30-30(doable within certain limitations as already noted), slug construction would be the primary determing factor when choosing a load. Even accuracy would take a back seat in importance to it. Most likely an offering from Barnes Bullets would get the nod.

 

[saturno_v]

I'm surprised you wouldn't. You can push it above 1400 ft-lbs.

Yes...really pushing it to get 1400 ft/lb....and with a small 55 grain bullet ready to fragment on impact and less than half the SD of the 30 WCF....

That is called being unreasonable...

The animal will not be in the perfect position for you at 50 yards...but within 100-150 yards I think the 30-30 is in play, especially with the heavy Nosler Partition bullets

 

[AKElroy]

No offense, but a deer that weighs under 100 lbs. has little to do with an elk, other than that they're both 4-legged herbivores. At least in Idaho, elk bucks bulls can be more than 10 TIMES that size.

http://imnh.isu.edu/digitalatlas/bio...elk/elkfrm.htm

Elk, for hunting purposes, is not just a somewhat taller, stouter deer. It's a larger animal, by an order of magnitude.

To put it another way, a large jackrabbit compares to a 90 lb. deer, as that deer compares to a buck bull elk.

The size range of Rocky Mountain Elk overlaps with North American Bison (450-1000+ lbs. vs. 850-2200 lbs.).

Just food for thought...

I said I have not shot an elk, not that I have not seen one. I am aware they are large, thick skinned, heavy boned animals. I am also aware that countless elk have been humanely taken with a .30-30, and that there are clear considerations beyond monster balistics that make a good hunting rifle. Quick handling, light weight, quick followup shots, these are all traits that lend themselves well to hiking in mountain country. I have taken more deer than I can count with scoped, flat shooting bolt guns, and I am bored with it. I simply do not feel challenged taking stationary game while looking through a 14X Leupold on a rifle that can shoot to point of aim as far as I can hold it. So I have started taking deer with the 94, as well as a Blackhawk .44.
This year, the hogs will get a shot from the SKS's and the nagant. Next thing you know, I will be carrying a bow. (OK,NOT THE BOW) The thought of the challenge posed in the hike, the stalk, and the close range needed for a 94 to work on elk is very refreshing and intriguing to me, and I see no irresponsibility in it if loads & ranges are carefully evaluated.

 

[joshk-k]

Wow! What a lively discussion my question has raised! I don't at all think I have this figured out yet. I'm thinking of attending an Appleseed shoot in a week or two and may let that experience help influence my decision making. I also asked in a thread in the rifle section, about adding aperture sights to the .30-30 for such a hunting experience, which seem like they should help me be proficient at slightly longer distances than I am with the buckhorns.

More new thoughts?

Josh

 

[ArmedBear]

Not a new thought, but an old one, from one of the oldest active hunters I know.

I'll try to remember his words as best I can.

"You owe it to the animal to use a round that's powerful enough.

"You owe it to the animal to practice field shooting, have your gun sighted in, and to be able to hit your target with it.

"You owe it to the animal to use a good scope at any distance where you can't place a shot perfectly every time with irons.

"You owe it to the animal."

 

[ArmedBear]

One more thing...

I shoot my .22 lever gun just fine with semi-buckhorns, as far as a .30-30 should be used on elk.

 

[AKElroy]

Not a new thought, but an old one, from one of the oldest active hunters I know.

I'll try to remember his words as best I can.

"You owe it to the animal to use a round that's powerful enough.

"You owe it to the animal to practice field shooting, have your gun sighted in, and to be able to hit your target with it.

"You owe it to the animal to use a good scope at any distance where you can't place a shot perfectly every time with irons.

"You owe it to the animal."

Wise words & I agree, to a point. A .50 BMG would certainly take an elk cleanly, and from a mile away if the shot presented. More cleanly than my 7 mag. or .270, in fact. The point of the hunt should be about far more than just killing the quarry; it should present a reasonable challenge in order to be truly rewarding. I have made every argument you have with regard to archers. I feel this is a bit of a different comparison, as the .30-30 chambering is demonstrably capable if the hunter does his part. I read into the original post that the author is looking for such a challenge.