Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters A real writing on the 30-30

Rifle loony you are not. Just sayin'.

Don't forget the two articles Mr. Waters did for on the 30-30 for Hand Loader magazine back in the late sixties and earl seventies in which one of the rifles he used was a model 54 Winchester. He found the case was the limiting factor to pressure than a strong action. I use mine for home defense.

I found a old JB article from the 90s in an old defunct magazine " Game Journal" about the 257 Roberts . Also JOC mentions it fairly often I his writings as the family had one used mostly by his wife and sons. JB may be able to steer you to where you could find that article on line somewhere it's a pretty good read.

As to the 30-30 I think it is really under rated asto it effectiveness. I just cringe when I see some typewriter jockey use the term rainbow trajectory or claim it to be effective to 100 yds or so. Next month the same writer will be yammering about shooting game at 600-700 yds with his whiz bang wonder cartridge. I have long maintained that the limiter on the 30-30 has been them fact that it image it's bones in a short barreled carbine that did not lend itself to scope sighting. I have long maintained I would rather have to hit a 8" steel gong at 200 with a open sighted 30-30 than the same gong at 300 with a open sighted 30-06. A friend and I use to both have octagon barreled 94s with rifle length barrels his a Canadian Centenial and mine a 94 classic both fitted with Williams receiver sights We would hang out at an old strip mine site and blast away at various rocks and dark/light spots in the old high wall. Of course after a trip or two we pretty much had the distances doped out but any cantaloupe sized rock at 300 yds or under was in grave danger. I curently have a winchester 64a that I haul out occasionally. Evidently the deer have a lot of respect for it as I have only had one really dumb one show itself while I was carrying ita d it was only 75 yds or so which was mostly a pud shot and didn't require much of a stretch . As to cast bullets I would like to get my hands on one of the NRA muskets and the ladder sights on it. That would be a fun rock blaster. Now I wonder if the old strip mine was ever reclaimed. Hummmm

With an open sighted .30-30 I've killed an 8 point buck at 200 yards, a turkey at 175 yards, and a Bull Moose up close and personal. None of those were very difficult feats either. It's way more than a hundred yard deer gun.

Reminds me back 15 or so years ago a fellow hunter came back to camp to ask for help finding a deer he had shot. He said," the deer was about 75 yards away and he was only using a .30-30", rather apologetically. The deer lay about 50 yards from where it was shot.

Yep, the perception of the .30-30 as very short-ranges is common, both among hunters and gun writers. But that isn't the big reason very few articles on hunting with the .30-30--or, especially, handloading the .30-30--are published anymore.

The .30-30 isn't written about much because, as some of the previous posts noted, there simply isn't much interest. Most hunters who've used the .30-30 for a long time know what it will do, and aren't usually interested in reading gun magazines, because they're not interested in the latest "advances" in cartridges, rifles, scopes, etc. Which is what most gun magazines publish these days. (Actually, they mostly did way back when, too, something we often forget because a lot of what they covered is now old.)

Interest in handloading the .30-30 is even smaller, because the percentage of .30-30 users who handload is probably far below the percentage of handloaders who use newer cartridges. Unlike a lot of factory ammo these days, factory .30-30's are pretty cheap and don't require "premium" bullets to work well.

And despite what some on this thread might believe, handloading the .30-30 doesn't actually change it's capabilities much either. As I already noted, spitzers don't make a substantial difference in trajectory because they're not started very fast, even with newer powders. While the .30-30 certainly is much more than a 100-yard cartridge, it isn't a 400+ yard cartridge, and that's what most handloaders are interested in. And despite what some people have suggested here, even those few hunters who handload .30-30's are about as interested in cast bullets as eating tofu.

Consequently, even when magazines do assign something on handloading the .30-30, it's not going to be a long feature article. Instead it's going to be short, and mostly consist of new powders and bullets. There's very little interest in old powders and bullets that the few .30-30 handloaders have been using for decades.

Why would there be? Previous writers have covered that subject numerous times, as some posters have pointed out here, and loading data for those same old powders and bullets is abundant and free on the Internet.

In fact, I'd be willing to bet a few bucks that after my column (limited to 1200 words) on handloading the .30-30 appears in GUNS, more readers will ask why the space was wasted when there are so many newer cartridges around. A few old .30-30 fans will probably feel good, but a few more will complain that their favorite old load wasn't mentioned.

Try as you might, you can't please them all, John!

Geesh, only way I can see that far down here is to look straight up.

My hunting world:

Paco Kelly's book on Lever Guns has some great stuff on the .30-30.. Don't use mine all that much, but I don't shoot as much big game as I used to either..

I kinda think they (.30/30) put the "huntin'" back in deer hunting.

Doesn't take any fieldcraft to pot one from a blind at 250 yards (some minor skill, yes, but not fieldcraft).

I just took up the .30/30 again, after a 40 year lay-off. It's kinda fun to sneak up on deer again, like we used to try to, when we were kids and had zero skills but lots of ambition.

It's harder to find a place to "still-hunt" these days, but when you can, it's still more funner. Instead of picking a spot with a long view, getting down in the brush kinda makes it more "interesting" for me.
I guess I could do that with a bow, but I ain't backslidin' THAT far back. I have limited time to hunt, so I will keep on using a rifle.

Yep, am semi-planning to take out the Model 64 Winchester I purchased last year during our visit to Whittaker Guns. It's the rifle used for my handloading column for GUNS, and it shoots pretty well, even with a "mature" guy behind the sights.

I'll be all over your article! I just received a pristine 1980 Marlin 336 .30-30 and I do reload. I look forward to it!

Expat

I've always thought the 64 to be the most handsome of all lever guns. Never had the jack in my jeans to own one so, I settled for a 1977 Marlin 336A, which has done fine. Although, in the thickets I hunt, my 336SC is a bit handier.

That's the one you bought out from under me? I've been waiting to see a "write-up" on that one. I've been wondering what I missed out on, when you got to it before I did.

Actually, with my eyesight, my Marlin is a better choice for me. The M8-4X I stuck on top of it helps me immensely. It's nice and handy, the little 336SC (short magazine, 20" barrel) is fun to pack around, and a heckuva lot different than my 24" barrelled M70 .270, but I gotta admit the .270 is known as "Old Death" in some circles. The Marlin gets fed "store-bought" ammo, as I don't think I'll ever shoot it enough to bother loading for it. Besides, the ammo companies have had a LONG time to get the ammo/bullets right, and they've done an awfully good job of it, near as I can tell.

Yeah, if I weren't enamored of Savage M1899's as .30-30 vehicles I would entertain owning a Winchester 64.

Joe,

64's are nice rifles, but for a while, maybe 12 years ago, I had a Marlin 36 (not 336) .30-30 with 24" barrel, half-magazine and Williams receiver sight. It was really accurate too, and often I wonder why it ever got sold!

ratsmacker,

Yep, that's the one!

The first thing I mention in my column is why anybody would bother handloading the .30-30. Then, of course, I discuss the handloads...:-)

I had a Marlin 36 as well. it had a two digit serial#. very nice rifle but the trigger was awful.Unfortunately someone had reblued the case hardened receiver which looked kind of strange.

Gun scribes have been writing for decades how much more effective the .35 Rem is over the .30-30. I don,t think any of them were well versed in both cartridges. I've found at 150 yards and beyond the 30-30 is significantly more effective of the two. At close range the .35 is better though.

The Ultimate 30-30 Benchrest rifle
Mike Turner has taken the 30-30 beyond anybodies thoughts.

http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?95849-Why-I-Shoot-the-30-30-in-Benchrest