• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Most Underappreciated Rifle Caliber

Status
Not open for further replies.
I had a Savage M340 in .30-30, sold it to my uncle. It was a bolt gun. It's long gone. The only .30-30 I have now is a Contender, 12" hunter barrel. I've just never owned a lever, weird, eh? I don't have a lot against 'em, but only lever gun I've ever owned is my Rossi in .357 magnum.
Click to expand...

As coincidence would have it, I also own a Savage M340 in .30-30... picked it up on Gunbroker last year. It's a good shooter too. I've heard about Contenders in .30-30, but never had occassion to try one. Notice, I said "most" American .30-30's were levers, not that "all" are. My best info says the Savage M340 (as well as equivelents under other brand names like the Springfield M325) were discontinued about 25 years ago due to lack of demand because of low popularity. While this thread is about "underappreciated" cartridges, I would throw in that while many shooters don't appreciate .30-30 in general, many .30-30 shooters don't seem to appreciate a bolt action rifle chambered in this round. I don't know for sure, but it just seems that way from where I'm sitting. Whether that's a tradition thing or just that a good many people are unaware that a crankbolt was chambered for it or a question of "why is this necessary", I couldn't venture a guess.

With mention of .357magnum, I think this round is well appreciated among shooters of revolvers and revolver-chambered leverguns. However, I have noticed a good many threads where .357 was dismissed (read: underappreciated) as un-tacticool because, it seemed, most who posted wanted to talk-up something semiautomatic with lots of plastic. I'll take a .357magnum levergun any day.

Thinking some more back over the history of the .30-30, I just remembered where it came from. Go all the way back to the old BP .38-55. This round, after the case was shortened, became the .375Winchester. There was a time not so long ago when the .375Win. was considered the "King of Elk Cartridges" and was chambered in a variety of levers and crankbolts. Shorten the .375Win. (103 years ago) and neck it down to .308 and it became the .30-30Win. in its original form with the 160gr lead bullet (which over time evolved into the round we know today with 150gr and 170gr offerings). It could be that .38-55 and .375Winchester are underappreciated at this time even though .38-55 is currently available in new production rifles from Marlin and H&R.
 
.30-30, what's with these foreign junk rounds? .30-30 is OUR cartridge!
Click to expand...
Reading this thread has been fun.

I, too, have been recently drawn into an interest in the .30-30.

This is surprising because I've been on a search for over a year for my next rifle, a "utility rifle", one that would "get the job done" as a "go to" rifle, have widely available inexpensive ammo, even in a SHTF/EOTWAWKI event.

I've explored bolts, pumps & levers. I've looked at full length rifles & scouts. I've read reviews, threads & pages and looked at stats (until I'm blue in the face) about .308, .30-06, 7mm08, & .243.

But for some reason, until recently, I overlooked the .30-30 thinking, "It's so yesterday."

Recently, I started reading more about it, and remembering a Marlin 336 (in .35 Rem) that I once had, and I'm liking what I'm reading about the .30-30.

I'm pretty certain now that my next rifle will be that overlooked .30-30, probably as a Marlin 336W that I hope to scouterize (to coin a word) as a cowboy assault rifle.

I'll probably still buy a bolt in .308 or 7mm08 someday. But for now, a (nearly) overlooked .30-30 feels right.

Nem
 
Different approach

Wouldn't the most underappreciated rifle cartridges be those for which neither rifles nor ammo is still in production?

Rounds like the 5mm Remington? Can't say that one was widely appreciated.
Or how about those that used to be popular, but today are only found rarely still in use? Like the .32-40 or the .25,.30, &.32 Remington? Or the .303 Savage? There are many more. .348 Winchester? etc.

Although there area lot of rifles out there, .32 Winchester Special ammo is currently not in production (at least by Winchester).

In a couple of decades (or less) we may see the same fate strike the new "short magnums". Or only some of them. Or it may take longer. Lots of rounds have served well for a half century or more, only to fade away as customer's tastes change, or the best rifles for them become outmoded.
 
Hi 44AMP...

I agree with you, 44AMP, especially about the recent crop of so-called "Short Magnums", most of which I suspect will soon go the way of the Herter's .401 PowerMag.

It is the calibers such as the .270 Win., 30/06, .22/250, .243 Win., .308 Win. and maybe the 7mm/08 that earn their longevity I feel most comfortable recommending to people. "Flash in the pan" is usually an apt description for most of the rest.

:) local opinions may vary.
 
I am also a huge fan of the .280 Rem. It's easily as versitile (on paper) as the venerable 30-06, and in many cases and categories, outperforms the -06. This is not to take away from the -06 legacy, it is a GREAT round for the ages, but the facts are there for all to see. the .280 Rem is one hell of a cartridge without a doubt.

To answer why it didn't catch on, well, back when it was initially supposed to be released (around the same time period as the .270), Remington shelfed it for the war effort... and continued with it later... also, it's initial release was intended for autoloading firearms and pressures weren't up to snuff for the bolt-action crowd... so it was somewhat ignored by the masses... There's plenty more to the whole marketing and development than this.

This is an "in a nutshell" explsnstion...
 
Yet another vote (6th or 7th? I lost count) for the .358 Winchester. Any gun makers listening out there? If not, maybe .35 Whelen?
 
I'll go with a couple I have that I think fit the bill. The .35 Rem and the 8x57 Mauser.
 
short mags

I'd say the winchester shortmags are the most underappreciated at the moment. Years ago before them, I remeber reading about all the ill's of belted cases, short life, bad design, unneeded ect. The common argument of the day was that the Newton cartridges were the superior design that were ahead of their time, but we'd have to make do with the belted mags because they were the only ones available. When short magnums hit the scene, with efficiency, seemingly endless caselife,excelent design, and comprable velocity, all of the thing that were talked about before, the belted magnums instantly become timeless classics, and the shorts troublesome newcomers that are doomed to obscurity, kind of a self fullfiling prophecy. The Short mags are the Newton magnums reincarnated and shooters are too set in their ways to realize it.

IMG_0127.gif

a 6.5Newton, 30Newton and a 300WSM
 
.300 Weatherby;it seems to have taken a back seat to all these short mags,beltless mags.if you compare ballistics,the 300 wby easily holds its own.many of these new rounds are the equivilent of re inventing the wheel. 25-06;another overlooked round;great for handloaders,low recoil, flat shooting,great varmint/deer round.257 wby;great ballistics,too, chambered in nothing but weatherby guns at this point,no one but wby makes the ammo too.:cool:
 
For anything in U.S or Canada the 30-30.

My friend took a Grizzly in Alberta while out deer hunting. It was in profile about seventy five yards across a shallow stream. One round entered the heart and exited, the other went through the lungs and remained in the animal.

The rifle and new ammo ads in magazines sure are sexy. You can visualize exactly where the writer is telling you you can be if only you buy this rifle with this super round which has a speed of x and a meplat of y and energy at six hundred yards of z. So what? A .30 bullet from a Winchester 94 is a fast hard hitting projectile compared to a black-powder rifle or an arrow or a spear.The Plains Indians used spears and arrows and our ancestors used pistol rounds in rifles to kill Bison. Hek, the Inuit were hunting Elk, Moose and Polar Bear with Winchester 44-40's.

A friend of mine just bought a new 300Winchester Magnum for Moose hunting in northern Ontario where it is all thick bush and water. I asked him how far he usually shot the animals. Average was 150 yards. You could do that with a 30-30 but it's not so manly. Right tool for the right job.

Now if your hunt takes you to where the landscape opens up and there is no cover then that 300 magnum comes into its own. I am just saying
I know change is exciting but lets keep our feet on the ground when discussing ammunition; you can't suddenly discount the old cartridges just because new ones come along. It's like a kid at Christmas not playing with his old toys in favour of his brand new ones.
 
quote from longhorngunman:

"Whoa Farmallmta! I have to defend my little commie friend here. By most accounts the 7.62*39 is a fine cartridge and capable of surprising accuracy. It get's it's inaccurate reputation from being shot in loose toleranced firearms and usually using cheaply made cartridge components (Wolf ammo)."

Okay, LHGM, I'll give you that the performance of that cartridge is closely tied to the performance of the guns themselves. And that they can do better if shot from a quality gun. Problem is, every time I go to shoot the cartridge it seems to come out of the barrel of one of those sloppy guns. Pretty hard to stomach that kind of performance when my VZ-24's or K-31 are such a pleasure to shoot.

Both the guns and the cartridge work well together for indiscriminately hosing down an area-- especially if you've got a dozen or more wild-eyed fanatics spraying rounds along with you and a political commissar pointing a machine gun at your backs in case you break and run. But other than that, why bother with a sloppy gun designed to shoot a sledgehammer at rather short ranges?

Again, I'm not saying it's useless, just overrated for most hunting uses that I can think of.
 
Hi CMB...

I think the lacklustre careers of the short magnums are in large part because people looked at the numbers, especially drop figures, and said "Why?"

The 270 WSM, for example, looks "better" on paper but "not better enough" to tempt many buyers.
The old 270 and its' ammo had already been picked as staple items in the Wallymart (et al) marketing plans that were catering to many new and less-knowledgable or less wealthy shooters. That's a big group!
A buyer had to buy a 270 WSM - at new gun prices, but they could go out almost anywhere and find a couple dozen regular 270s at used gun prices and really be just as well prepared as they would with a 270 WSM - and maybe with enough saved dollars in their pocket to buy their scope.
There certainly was no pressing reason for anyone with a regular 270, or a 280, to go out and switch to the 270 WSM... and plenty of reason to stay with the "tried and true". It takes an exceptional rifleman/reloader to be able to use a 270WSM well enough in the field to surpass a regular 270. And even then the difference will be largely esoteric.
So I think a lot of it can be explained by asking who, specifically, were the short mags supposed to be sold to??? All new cartridges face that dilemma and, if they don't find a healthy clientelle fairly quickly, they usually die on the vine.
Doesn't mean they were bad cartridges. How could anyone criticize a 150gr bullet at 3200 fps.? Mostly, I think, they are were not so well thought out down in the Marketing Dept.
 
a little more SM argument

I think the lacklustre careers of the short magnums are in large part because people looked at the numbers, especially drop figures, and said "Why?"

I dont think the Short mags were ever meant to offer up exciting, super high paper numbers, just copy the winchester/remington belted rounds in shorter, larger-diameter, beltless cases, with more modern design, thicker webs, steeper shoulders, less body taper, and sufficiently long necks. A 300win mag, long & belted, or short & stumpy will both perform within a knat's @$$ of one another, or 3300FPS with a 150 in my experience.

The part I dont understand about shooters, is that before the shortmags ever hit the scene, on bbs all the talk was of the backward and outdated way the modern belted magnums were designed with belted cases even though they served no purpose, and the fact that presented challenges to reloaders. Winchester was listening, and remedied those issues, and designed a new cartridge with similar ballistics, but in a package that is more user/reloader friendly. Guess what, It hasent been around for 30 years so it's got to be 'marketing bs', and it instantly elevated the belted case, that shooters once complained about, to 'classic' status, or to summarize; "that new wiz bang uber magnum wont do anything ol bessie hasent done for thutty years", nope, it wont, that was the whole Idea, but it is more efficient, has a modern, beltless case design, and can be reloaded until the necks spilt, rather than the caseheads seperate. No need to sell the elted mag if you allready own one, but no reason to buy one when your in the market for a cartridge of that performance level either, we finally have a better option.
 
Well, my vote is for the .22 and 6mm BR Remington. I have a five-shot one-hole group that is less than .1-inch between centers with the .22! Of course I used the rifle in my machine rest (couldn't have done it otherwise.) I have also shot a number of sub half inch groups with the 6mm. Most of the time when I am shooting either one of them, the other shooters have never heard of the cartridge! I think that that is definitely under appreciated!!! :eek:
 
As coincidence would have it, I also own a Savage M340 in .30-30... picked it up on Gunbroker last year. It's a good shooter too. I've heard about Contenders in .30-30, but never had occassion to try one. Notice, I said "most" American .30-30's were levers, not that "all" are. My best info says the Savage M340 (as well as equivelents under other brand names like the Springfield M325) were discontinued about 25 years ago due to lack of demand because of low popularity. While this thread is about "underappreciated" cartridges, I would throw in that while many shooters don't appreciate .30-30 in general, many .30-30 shooters don't seem to appreciate a bolt action rifle chambered in this round. I don't know for sure, but it just seems that way from where I'm sitting. Whether that's a tradition thing or just that a good many people are unaware that a crankbolt was chambered for it or a question of "why is this necessary", I couldn't venture a guess.
Click to expand...

Well, I bought my M340 brand new, so that dates me a little, I guess. :uhoh: At the time, the M788 Remington was also chambered in .30-30, another nice, inexpensive little rifle. My little 340 was a 1 MOA gun and shot almost anything pretty well. People who say the .30-30 isn't accurate have no experience with it. I also handloaded spitzers in it and my current Contender load involves a Nosler Ballistic Tip which really wakes up the cartridge and out of a rifle will give it 300 yard capability on medium game. I've also seen the M340 badged by Western Auto under the "Revelation" brand. I don't know of Sears or Montgomery Wards had versions, but it wouldn't surprise me. I have had a JC Higgins and a Revelation badged Mossberg shotguns before.

I think most .30-30 lever guns were sold, over the years, for the handy little rifles and not necessarily for the caliber, but I agree, the .30-30 is a capable round that is greatly under-appreciated. I'm going to be totin' my contender next weekend for opening day. ;) Out of that 12" barrel, the thing puts up just under 1000 ft lbs at 200 yards, enough to make it a 200 yard deer getter. The problem is HITTING the deer from a field rest at 200 yards. I ain't got sandbags and a bench rest in my stand, so I keep the shots to 100 yards or less. It's pistol hunting after all and it's supposed to be challenging.:D The GUN is capable of 1.5 MOA, but the shooter is only capable of minute of deer shoulder from a stand out to about 100 yards.
 
.30-30

I still use my old 1967 Marlin 336 RC more than any rifle I own. For deer hunting our property in Ky. it just plain works.

I have taken over 25 deer with this rifle and not one took a 2nd shot. Ranges have been from 10ft. to 150 yards.
 
Under appreciated . I would have to say the 7mm STW. This round took years to be recognized and Winchester dumped this for the more popular WSM series. I understand some of the pros and cons of this caliber , but over all it is one of the best rounds I have yet to shoot.
 
Another vote for the 54R. In my mind it can do most anything and has been doing it for over 110 years.
 
I, too, have been recently drawn into an interest in the .30-30.

This is surprising because I've been on a search for over a year for my next rifle, a "utility rifle", one that would "get the job done" as a "go to" rifle, have widely available inexpensive ammo, even in a SHTF/EOTWAWKI event.
Click to expand...

Whoa Farmallmta! I have to defend my little commie friend here. By most accounts the 7.62*39 is a fine cartridge and capable of surprising accuracy. It get's it's inaccurate reputation from being shot in loose toleranced firearms and usually using cheaply made cartridge components (Wolf ammo).
Click to expand...

I have walked a similar road; actually got the .30-30 first, then went on to get something in 7.62x39.

Similar rounds, with some potential overlap in applications. You can call the x39 "commie" and the platforms loose-toleranced, but these same platforms are as rugged as the .30-30 is classy and that counts for something in my book. Also, while people moan about the recent spike in x39 ammo price it still beats .30-30 (considered cheap for hunting ammo, mind you) by a long shot. I can only imagine what people would say if they had to pay the standard, not-on-sale going rate for.30-30 to get their cases of x39. Might blow a gasket or something.

That being said, .30-30 will always be an American classic. Nuff said. :) I have room for both, personally.


Which is more underrated? I personally would have to go with .30-30 considering both their relative ranks in their originally-designed applications and comparative level of general Internet badmouthing I've seen over the years... which is probably actually related, come to think of it.
 
hard to say which one wins as the most underappreciated but my votes go to 25-06 and 6 mm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
What's the most powerful milsurp?
Replies
23
Views
3K
GunsBeerFreedom
G
D
  • Locked
Most un- or under-appreciated military surplus rifle?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
5K
lencac
L
Mannlicher
  • Locked
Putting away some mil surp ammo for hunting rifles
Replies
4
Views
773
Sir Galahad
S
1948CJ2A
  • Poll
Favorite 8mm?
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
Mercy Me
Mercy Me
M
  • Locked
8mm Mauser for new rifle?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Runningman
R
Back
Top