Is ballistic an opinion???? The underestimated 30-30 against grizzlies...

[saturno_v]

Hello folks


Today I was at a Cabela's store and I started to chat with a couple of guys about...guns of course ;-) and I really struggle to understand the logic in some individual's opinions....

This people were talking down the 30-30 Winchester (I was lookign for a lever gun, I do not own one yet), calling it an "anemic round" and marginally good on deer.
The very same folks go fishing quite often in AK and as "bear medicine" (their own words) they carry Ruger revolvers in .44 magnum...

Hmm that made me think......I know real life is not ballistic tables but we still need to look at some numbers.....

Let's start this discussion saying that we imply the use of high quality bullets... a 460 Weatherby shooting a bullet made of butter won't stop anything, we know that.... ;-)

On average, your commercial load 44 Magnum fired from a pistol develops muzzle energy significantly less than HALF the energy of your average commerical load 30-30 Winchester 170 gr......some distance down the road and the difference is even more drammatic given the poor aerodynamic and inferior sectional density of the 44 bullet compared to the 30-30 (as we know that means less penetration...and you need penetration shooting a big bear).

Even if we invoke the mighty 454 Casull, the muzzle energy of your average comm load (Hornady data) is still less than our poor 30-30 and, like the 44 magnum example before, the farther you go the bigger bullet shed speed and energy more quickly that our rifle bullet....

Still if you listen some guys, seems like a 30-30 bullet will bounce off a grizzly like an air gun pellet.......

With this I do not mean that a 30-30 is a perfectly adequate grizzly round but there is some common ground between feeling yourself well protected with a 44 Mag revolver and feeling "naked' if you have a lever 30-30 in a grizzly situation....

What is your opinion on that??? Is a 30-30 hopeless in dangerous situations??

A little provocation: volume of fire versus power.....if you are facing a charging grizzly would you rather have only 3 slow shot with a typical 338 or 375 bolt action or 6 or 7 lightning fast shots with a lever 30-30???

(indeed an Alaskan guide once told me that he prefers having his pump action Remington 760 30-06 with a 10 rounds aftermarket magazine than a bolt action 375 any time of the day, in case of "hairy" situations...)

 

[highorder]

I dont know who to credit, but here goes;

"Shot placement is king, penetration is queen. everything else is angels dancing on the heads of pins."

the .30-30 will kill game larger than its class when the conditions are right.

 

[saturno_v]

I'll tell you even more...

I heard (and read) in several occasions that at relatively short distance (about 100 yards or so) a 30-30 dropped a deer on its track where the super duper magnum failed to do so and required tracking the game.....explanation??? The 30-30 bullet expanded beautifully making mash potato of internal organs, the magnum bullet just went through, did not have time to expand and wasted its energy outside the animal....

P.S.

I do not own a 30-30 (not yet)!!!!

 

[saturno_v]

I forgot to mention...

At 500 yards, a distance considered way outside the 30-30 territory, the little fella is still supersonic and retains way more energy of a 45 ACP at the muzzle....in theory, if you can compensate for the huge drop, you could probably still kill a deer!!!!

 

[klover]

After reading about bears,

I have come to know that no lung or heart makes little difference to an animal that can have a hibernating metabolism.

A CNS shot is what is desired. This is difficult because it is a thin column and at the head is protected by a very thick, slanted skull. Also they can run 45 miles per hour.

Still want to rely on any gun, let alone a measly 30-30?

I am an armchair Grizzly hunter.

 

[jpwilly]

We'll the basis of the discussion is basically the convienence of a rifles vs a handgun for backwoods protection when fishing. If in bear country I'd feel most comfortable with a big handgun caliber like the 44mag over say a 38spl snubnose but if I was going to bring a rifle I'd probably bring a little more than a 30-30. Some of those new chamberings for the Marlin lever actions would pack a lot more wallop! Yes the 30-30 is superior to a 44mag and it may seem a little silly to feel comfortable with a 44mag and not comfortable with a 30-30 but it's really a rifle vs handgun thing...clear as mud.

 

[saturno_v]

Jpwilly


Interesting comment....

I do not have much experience of bear country.....do you think a handgun is better than a rifle?? Easier to draw???

At the moment if I would go to bear country I would bring my faithful Mossberg 500 stuffed with 3 inch Brenneke Slugs.... ;-)

However the folks I was taking to were focused more on the round comparison rather than Rifle vs Handgun....

 

[jpwilly]

Handguns are not better than a rifle except for convienence purposes. I carry a handgun daily BUT if I knew I was going to end up in a gun fight or be attacked by a bear I would bring a rifle!

 

[justsurvivingincalifornia]

30-30 not the best round for bear hunting, but anything is better that nothing for selfdenfence. I agree it's better that most handgun rounds for penatration and wounding capabilties.

 

[.38 Special]

I am sure that were any of us actually faced with a charging grizzly we would want all the power we could possibly hold. A .577 would not be excessive.

I have heard an awful lot of stupid conversations in gun stores. .30-30 vs. .44 mag. for charging grizzly isn't at the top of the list, but it's still on the front page.

Oh, and anyone who thinks the .30-30 is "marginal" for deer has been reading way too much and hunting not nearly enough.

 

[saturno_v]

X jpwilly....

What do you think about a fully automatic Ak-47??

That would be my very first choice against any big bore rifles!!!!

The 7,62 X 39 maybe is not the greatest stopper but 30 of them should do the trick!!!

 

[dakotasin]

since many times you find these bears in water soaking wet, you need to consider that... there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of bullets from capable guns failing to penetrate a wet bear.

as for 30-30 vs 44 mag, eh, i have no opinion and am highly unlikely to have either in bear country so it is a moot point w/ me.

 

[Matt304]

if you are facing a charging grizzly would you rather have only 3 slow shot with a typical 338 or 375 bolt action or 6 or 7 lightning fast shots with a lever 30-30???

How about 1 shot with a 600 Nitro Express?

I get where you are going with the above, and yes it does make sense. The fact is it's all preference. There is a counterpoint which can be made by either side to defend its statements, to the end. And the preference factor still always remains.

Some people want multiple, fast and accurate shots. Some people want something easily carried. Some people want downright mean power.

If it is something you are carrying fishing...a sidearm for protection, you most likely won't choose the rifle. You want something on you, accessible in a scuffle. A big caliber handgun does the trick because it transmits shock well. The handgun may not penetrate as far, but it will leave a wound path even larger to make up for this.

Now if I was hunting grizzly country, I would use a big bolt gun that is lightweight. Something big-bore for the firepower since you are carrying anyways. 375HH on up, or 3.5" mag 12ga sabots. There is one big difference between those 3 shots, and the 6-7 you could take: the latter takes twice the amount of time to perform if you are actually to aim those shots. You won't just be rapid firing.

 

[Oohrah]

If you had an Email address, I could forward pictures of what is left of
a recent jogger who emptied a handgun into one. SEVERAL 7mm Mag.
bullets into the vital area ended the rampage. On the first victim, only
the upper torso remained. Don't recall how many days of pistol lead to
the several shots additional that stopped further threats.
Number one, rounds whatever, must penetrate mass and bone to reach
the vitals with everything going for you. Heavy penetrating handgun
bullets might in large diameter bullets. Most likely unless a controled or
partition bullet, the 30-30 won't fit the bill. Yep probably has been done.
Even know a Canadian Cree that takes about everything with a 22 Hornet.
Not my sport, bad shots happen.
I think a margin of safety might be a 12ga sabot type copper slug, as
penetration is most meaningfull, and only hits into the vitals count. The
above incident took place in Alaska. The Griz was world record or near
it. For some reason, I took it out of my file and kept the first victim one only
They are truely to be avoided rather than stand off. Purpose hunt, always
use enough gun and a top notch guide.

 

[elmerfudd]

You're both right. The .30-30 is anemic for hunting big bears AND the .44 is even more so, but the .44 is there in case of an emergency and not for the purpose of actually pursuing such animals. If I were actually hunting grizzlies, I would want at least a .308 Winchester and preferably something bigger.

 

[inherentical]

If I were in that scenario, out of all my guns I'd choose my Marlin Guide Gun in .45-70. Make fun of me if you wish, but if I only have time for one or two shots I really want them to count.

 

[raz-0]

Well basically the discussion is arguing which is the better a yugo or a renault le car.

You can get a bullet very servicable for dispatching bear in .44, but the pistol won't push it fast enough.

In .30-30 you get the velocity you need, but the bullets are so-so.

Then there's the question of convenience. A .44 you always have with you close at hand is worth moe than rifle you put down or didn't bring in the first place. The putting it down bit is a real issue as the conversaiton usually implies you aren't out ther hunting bear, so you are probably planning on doing something else with your hands at some point.

But if I was going to pack a .30-30 sized gun for the job, I'd rather take my marlin 444p with 280gr or 300gr swift a-frame bullets moving at a decent clip. Weighs about the same and will make a grizzly pretty unhappy. a marlin guide gun in 45-70 will do the job very nicely too.

 

[LeonCarr]

If memory serves me right (and sometimes it does), the world record grizzly bear in 1965 was killed by a guy named Jack Turner with a .30-30.

Me, I would use a .338 Win Mag or bigger in rifles, or a 12 gauge 870 loaded with Brenneke Slugs. Don't use little stuff on something that can eat you.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Z71]

I read an artical somewhere regarding the .30-30's preformance. Part of the artical was about the .30-30 and bears. Included some incidents about blasting large bears with the caliber.

Not just sure where I saw this artical, but believe it may have been an Outdoor life artical from the 70's or 80's, or possibly from Hunters Digest. Had lots of info on the .30-30.

 

[stan in sc]

I'll take a tank please.Thank you.

 

[Shawnee]

The good gentlemen at the store may carry their Super Blackhawks in such a fashion that they can bring them to bear (no pun intended) and get off multiple shots faster than one might expect to do with a rifle (of any caliber or action). My personal best with a single-action is 5 bowling pins in about 7 seconds from the "surrender position".
Unfortunately - 7 seconds equals probably about 100yds. for a really determined grizzly and there may not even be that much visibility.

Starting from a "port arms" carry my personal best for two shots on target (at 25 yds.) with a 30/30 Marlin is slightly over 3 seconds.... which means I have to start shooting at about 40yds. whether the bear is charging or not.

Recent Tiger killings with a .40 caliber notwithstanding, to me, a Remington 1100 loaded to the gills with #2 Buck and slugs sounds like a better weapon than a .44 Mag. or 30/30, but being able to run faster than my fishing partners sounds even better yet.

 

[.38 Special]

There is a huge difference, of course, between hunting an unalarmed grizzly, where I have time to pick my shot, and stopping an angry grizzly that wants me in pieces.

A .44 or .30-30 might be adequate for the former, although I would certainly want a large bore rifle for back-up. IMO, a .44 or .30-30 for the latter are just two different versions of suicide.

 

[RSVP2RIP]

There was a great article in Shooting Times I believe by Sam Fadala about broad meplat hard cast lead bullets and shooting elephant with a 45/70. I think that the greatest limitation of using a 30/30 for anything larger than deer is the rapind expansion of the factory ammunition. If a bullet that didn't expand out of the 30/30 were used, we would have a different opinion of it for killing bears. The "Mag vs. Nag" argument of shooting a deer and having to track it with the super duper mag cartrige is how the bullet reacted and at what range. A conventional bullet fired at very close range will blow up from a high velocity number. My brother shot a deer in the sticking point with a 284 winchester at 6 yards and the deer didn't drop for 30 mins until I put one in it with a 444 marlin. The Seirra 139gr Gameking just blew apart on the sternum and the lungs were in almost perfect condition. From this case we see that the 284 winchester is not good for anything but praire dogs, right??? If I had loaded those 284's with a Swift A-frame, the deer might have had two butt holes from the same shot at the same distance.

 

[MCgunner]

In today's short magnum crazy gun marketing hype world (you can't live without one, ya know) the .30-30 is greatly under-appreciated. It's way, way old school, yesterday's news, welcome to last week, whatever. But, it works as good as it ever did and I've been told stories of the Inuit after WW2 and probably before (but the guy telling the story was an "Indian agent" after his service in WW2), and they used .30-30 almost exclusively. .30-30 ammo was the most available and did the job. They hunted bear, griz, with it and from what I'm told, knew what they were doing and where to put the round to get the job done. It's pretty much just that simple. That's probably why the .30-30 has past its centennial and is still a wildly popular round combined usually with a lever gun. Myself, I think it makes a fantastic big game pistol round.

All that said, I think a .325 WSM in a Browning BLR would be almost ideal in Alaska for DEFENSE. Keep your 12 gauge.

 

[cobrian45]

I start by saying I have no experience hunting or being charged by Grizzlies. Like some have said here, the .30-30 is a round (I love mine) that I consider to be adequate in good conditions for killing bear. Charging bear is a different ball game. My choice? No, but if it's what I had, it's what I would use. That said, I did have a lot of friends I met while guiding here that guided in Alaska later on and most carried 12 Gauge with slugs followed by 00 buck with extended magazines if they could get them. That made sense to me and I never questioned it. If you're talking about a bear charging, range will be closing quickly and projectile energy at distance will not be much of a factor.