In the latest Petersen's Hunting Wayne Van Zwoll, an author I've always greatly admired, wrote about an elk he'd wounded and lost using a .30-30 at 200 yards. I've never hunted elk, but isn't using a 30-30 on elk at 200 yards asking for a lost animal?

With the fabulous choices of calibers we have in today's world, using a 30/30 on elk suggests poor judgement. In this instance, poor judgement is verified by the decision to take a 200 yard shot.
Van Zwoll has been around long enough to understand Hagel's rule.

The 30-30 is a fine elk cartridge fishdog, you just have to be reasonable with your shots.

The problem wasn't the .30-30, it was the 200 yards. The .30-30 has taken tons of elk, but the shooter has to know both his and the cartridge's limitations.

30-30 at one time was considered to be a very powerful cartridge suitable for pretty much anything in NA. That being said, the cartridge has some limits, just as every other cartridge dose. While a 200 yard shot is doable, its not the smartest thing to do. I was not there nor Have I read the artical mentioned. 30-30's took truck loads of elk moose deer sheep and what have you over the years. I had a Marlin 336 so chambered and it was fine, killed a lot of game with it, but I found I was better able to place bullets better when shooting under 150 yards, 125 was my limit. Peep sights and I wore glasses at the time. With a scope maybe a few yards more, I don't know I never put a scope on any of the lever action rifles I owned or played with, I liked the light flat easy carry lines the Marlin had, and puting a scope on it would defeat that purpose. The 170 gr Bullets that are loaded in the 30-30 do way more that what paper says they should.

Jeez, where does all this stupid talk come from?

The thuty-thuty will work just fine on elk. It will kill just as effective as a 308 at that distance using a cup & core.

And who gives a rip what Haglel's rule is whatever that is.

I'm with SU35 on this. If an elk is hit right at 200 yards with a 170-grain .30-30 bullet, it's gonna kill the elk, I don't care how "wimpy" the .30-30 seems.

The ballistics of a 170 RN at 200 yards aren't very different from a 180 spitzer at 600 from a .300 WSM or Winchester factory load. Yet a lot of hunters would take a crack at an elk at 600 yards with either of those .300 magnums, where shot placement is a lot more difficult than at 200 with any sort of rifle.

I'm thinking that poor bullet placement would be the cause for losing the Elk. No one is a perfect shooter. Something went wrong for Mr van Zwoll. I also think that the audience pressure of being a gun writer could be what tips someone into taking an iffy shot. Or perhaps Dr van Zwoll just had a bad day like we all do.

just my opinions...

And with Hornady's Leverlution ammo its even better.

Wow! Being a gunwriter is getting to be more and more like being a cop, huh? You're a public figure held to an artificially high standard of abilities and pilloried when revealed as human or your equipment fails to perform like a magazine ad.

If you've never made a bad shot or missed entirely, you've not been hunting or shooting much...or are extraordinarily lucky.

I've taken deer several times that have been wounded by other hunters. How many of those guys do you think told their friends about the one that dropped then ran away when they were halfway out of the stand?

Takes an honest man to admit it in nationwide print. Perhaps so that others may learn?

BTW, any caliber the state game department deems legal is suitable. We all have the right to pay our money and take our choice.

We need to ensure that remains the norm and that we are not all legislated into having but one .30-'06 and 10 rounds of 180 grain softpoints per year issued to us at the state store.

Or maybe we'll simply be told that hunting is wrong and no longer allowed.

Let's all hang together, boys and girls.

A Speer 170g running 2160fps at the muzzle will still have about 1723fps/1121fpe at 200 yards. A 170g Parition running 2200fps will have 1635fps/1009fpe.

Zeroed for MPBR for a 6" diameter target, both wil be down less than 3" at 200 yards.

For me the questio is will the bullets expand reliably at that range. I tend to put more faith in the Partition RN.

Would I take a shot at an elk at that range? Under the right conditions, probably so. Would I hit what I aimed at? Probably so - my Marlin is scoped and MPBR zeroed for slightly over 200 yards.

The .30 WCF works wonderfully on elk. Actually, it kills elk way better than the uninformed would ever frackin' believe.

Dr. Wayne PhD wasted an elk and it ran off to feed the buzzards & coyotes. His shame, not that of the cartridge.

The nut behind the buttplate makes all the difference. In this case the nut was loose and rattling.

Steve

I shot a cow elk end to end in the sage at 185 yards with a 45-70 Marlin 1895 equipped with Ashley Outdoors (now XS) sights. 400 grain flat point Speer with a velocity of 1750 fps 15 feet from the muzzle. One step and dove off a 50' very steep slope. Was using a cartridge older than the 30-30 at that range a mistake?

I'll wait to hear the expert opinion of folks who've never seen a live elk.

Laffin' here. Yeah, we'd like to hear that!!!

One of our wranglers used a .30-30 a lot, when he wasn't killing the schit out of elk with his .250-3000. He swore that the .30-30 was a much better killer, not that there was a damn thing wrong with the .250, because "the bullet goes through an elk sloooowly and just kills the stinkin' bastards DEAD, DEAD, DEAD."

Having seen Hank kill a passel of elk with his .30-30 carbine and having done a half-dozen myself, I'm not about to question any of his countyboy wisdom.

Steve

Steve,

A lot of plain, old fashioned wisdom here from you. No surprise there!

Good on 'ya. Glad you are at the 'Fire.

(another)Steve

Why anyone would think that 200 yards with a 30-30 on Elk is out of the question?
I am glad to see Steve, SU, and JB step in on this one.

Haven't seen the article. No longer subscribe to the SOS. Any of them.

Having carried (and not shot but one deer and my first moose with) a .30-30 for the last 45 years, I'd call it poor bullet placement, tho personally, 200 yards is pushing the .30-30's capability on elk IMO. Pushing, not exceeding. With good placement at that range, it should do the job. I suspect a .300 Mag in this instance would have achieved the same result- placement is placement, and a bad hit sucks.

I killed my one and only elk with a .260, bang-flop, at 150 yards, several years ago.

That isn't 'sposed to happen either.

My "walkaout' rifle here in Alaska is a '94 Winchester - my father's. Been carrying it around for over 20 years, never had to use it. I'm just not that curious on how it would do against a charging brown bear either!

On paper, it's better than a .44 Mag handgun.

No need to wait just look around, many easterners (not all of you) lecturing the who, what, when and where about elk around here.

/rant

As one who has read and admired Wayne for many years, his reputation is one of using modest cartridges at reasonable ranges, with an emphasis on accuracy. I have not read this latest article yet, but I doubt Van Zwoll would take a shot that did not have a high probability of success. Certainly he could use more caliber, but that's his choice. If it was good enough for Wayne, it's good enough for me. He is one of the good guys.

I'm from the East and some people I know use 30-30 on Moose. Bottom line is if you know how to hunt and shoot and have chosen the right bullet (170gr nosler partition) I just don't see how it's not going to be effective on any elk at 200 yards or less. Now, I'm not saying that people here can't hunt/shoot, but you know what I'm talking about.

CLB

Nailed a 6x6 bull at 213 lasered yards with my Marlin .45-70. The bull stood stock still for a couple seconds and just as I was getting rready to shoot again he tipped over.

The .45-70 is a completely different animal than the .30-30, however. My 350g North Fork load still has 1579fps and 1936fpe at 200 yards. contrast that to my 170g Partition RN load for my .30-30 with 1635fps and 1009fpe at 200 yards.

As I said before, I'd probably take a 200 yard shot at elk with my .30-30. But it is zeroed for slightly over that range, scoped, and I practice at that range and greater. And I'd wait for a good broadside shot.

Wow! I'm not the only one who thinks a .30-30 will work effectively on elk. I remember a few years ago I posted on another forum my desire to do a cow hunt with a Model 94 in .30-30 with 170 grain bullets. I stated that I felt if I found any elk inside of 150 yards I wouldn't hesitate to drop the hammer. I sure some keyboards were wet from the spittle coming from the mouths of those who thought I was being not only unethical but plain ignorant and stupid in my rifle and cartridge choice.

I�m very happy to see that I�m not alone in my thinking. Shortly after posting that I had to part with my beloved M94 Win, to finance a hunting trip. However I�m waiting on another that will arrive this week at my local transfer FFL. The rifle needs a little TLC but I should have her in hunting shape by this next season. I just might have to give the old Thuty-Thuty the nod this year.

taylorce1,

Exactly! no reason not to feel good about the 30-30. Not to say we need to try and smash all kinds of bone, but a good lung shot would be sweet. I'm looking at a Marlin 336XLR, that rifle looks awesome..

I carry a 30-30 every year for elk, though not exclusively; mostly for the really thick stuff where you smell em before you see em. I really love the handiness of the little carbine and, yes, it kills stuff very dead.

Ain't that some smell?????

Kind of a mixture of licorice and rancid urine. You cannot exactly describe it, but you sure know it.

Stinkin' buggers. And soooo good to eat.

Steve

I don't know, I like Van Zwoll writing and approach to firearms, he's not one for super mags and likes lighter recoiling firearms. I did not read the article but do give him credit for admitting to the loss.

As far as a 30-30 on elk, its been getting it done a helluva lot longer then most "modern" cartridges and again as with any rifle, you must know its limitations. I believe Mr Van Zwoll is aware of those limitations and unfortunately had a bad day. For me personally, if I was to use a 30-30 on an elk or moose, I would load the 170 gr Nosler Partition as fast as I could and keep it within 100 yds, 150 at most but then again if I was using my 338-06, my limitation would keep me within 250 yds which I feel I'm comfortable with.

NO.

Iam in a state of depression now that I cant use my 30-30 on elk anymore guess Iam back to using my 25-35. danny

Danny, yes, you're screwed now. I bet the elk read Van Zwoll's article, and now they've all wisened up.

A couple of years ago, I read the story of how the last Grizzly in Idaho (turn of last century) was killed by a sheep ranch hand, goin after him into the bush with a 30-30. How could it go from "big medicine" to glorified BB gun in a century?

If Van Zwoll lost one, it's because he was doing it, not writing about it or talking about it. It's going to happen, though I bet it'll happen to Wayne a LOT less than to me.... Cougars got to eat, too. JMO, Dutch.

Yep, if you hunt long enough stuff happens. I have hunted with Wayne and he is a good shot and a careful shot, but there are no guarantees in any human endeavor.

And I actually think it takes some courage to admit a bad outcome, particularly when you know you are opening yourself up for criticism and untold numbers of internet potshots. But I think it adds a measure of credibility to his entire body of writing.

+1. The internet hang-jury is always looming in the wings. I've no doubt in Mr. Van Zwoll's abilities. That shot could have been missed with any cartridge. Maybe the Elk started to move in that moment ... could be any number of reasons. Who really cares?

I haven't read the article at all, and don't want to stir up too much. Did Van Zwoll blame the cartridge or his shooting ability? Or was it something that he did many years ago, and just mentioned it in the article?

BTW my M94 Win came in last night, on a quest to find the parts for it to get it back in shooting shape. I still hear a cow hunt calling my name with that rifle!

Now the cat's out of the bag. Boddington started it with his article and now it's en vogue to print such realities. This is just gunwriters trying to make us believe they are not a bunch of supershootin', primer pocket scrubbin', benchrestin' game zappers. We see right thru it though . Maybe Mule Deer could start a 4th book on all the bad shot's on game he has seen and made.

All kidding aside, I like all the tales, good, bad and ugly. More is usually learned from bad experiences IMHO.

We all screw up. That's a fact.

Steve

Hunting is not an exact science, stuff happens. Even if we follow all the rules of ethics and good judgment, anyone one of us can make a plain old bad shot every once in a while. Hopefully, we all do as much as we can to reduce the chances of such things happening. We should always practice more diligently and become as familiar as we can with the capabilities of our hunting rifles. We should limit our shots to ones we are highly confident we can make. If we don't do this and we wound and lose an animal, we should question our judgment and our ethics. Lucky shots have no place in hunting. If for instance, we rely on "luck" to hit a running bull elk at say 200 yards, then that's using bad judgment and questionable ethics. If on the other hand, we've practiced that shot and can make it consistently, then we're golden. I guess it comes down to whether or not we concern yourself with causing an animal undo suffering if we wound it. Has our desire, zeal, or whatever, to get that running bull, caused us to take a shot that is beyond our level of competence? We should always care and consider what happens if we wound an animal. That's what ethics are all about.

I for one am glad to see writers telling us of misses, bad hits and an occasional lost animal. It may help a novice hunter, or even a veteran, to be more aware the next time they pull the trigger on a game animal. I don't know Mr. Van Zwoll personally, but through his writing, I see no reason to question or doubt his hunting ethics, judgment or ability. His use of a 30-30 at 200 yards likely has little to do with the reported outcome with that elk. He probably just made one of those dreaded bad shots.

I more than most. I have never met Wayne but after many years of reading his articles I don't see him sending a "hail mary" shot at an elk. Sh*t just happens to humble us all.

Yep and his first mistake was taking a fine saddle rifle that works moderately well on deer sized game and hunt elk with it.

I knew a good old boy that grew up hunting Alabama whitetail with his trusy .30-30. Guy was a very good hunter and figured out our Roosevelt elk in a hurry. His third bull was shot at 105 yards. It had just swam across a river so every bullet strike made a clearly seen splash when the water blew off of the hair. Five rounds to the boiler room and that bull walked off into very thick brush. They never did recover him. Heavy rain washed away all of the blood and make fresh tracks look like the rest of them in a couple of minutes.

He bought a real elk rifle as soon as he got home.

Why people try to use the least possible weapon is beyond me. My dad told me to use the right tool for the job and if you have as access to as many fine rifles as Von Zwoll his choice of weapons was a appropriate as trying to frame a house with a tack hammer.

I find it hard to believe 5 rounds at 100 yards to the sweet spot with a 30WCF wouldn't kill any size elk as well as any "real" elk cartridge.

I guess some guys can`t hunt with out a 300 Mangler with a $2,000 Swarovski on it.The right gun for you is the one you use.30-30 or 30-06 what ever trips your trigger.

SteelyEyes... seriously... moderately well on deer?

That statement at the top of your thread makes more obvious the already obvious... believe those who have the collective field experience and the grounds upon which to make an informed pronouncement. I'll take Steve & John's comments as carrying a bit more authority that this hear-say.

I have a 30-30 that my Aunt & Uncle bought me for my 17th birthday. My first buck sure didn't think it worked moderately well. Of course it wasn't good enough for me, so I bought a 30'06 (lemme guess... thats another "tack hammer" too, eh), a 257 AI, a 7x57, a 338'06, and will buy others. I tell friends of mine to whom I loan that wonderful little lever rifle that I honestly haven't ever needed anything since I was given that rifle.

Were it not for this rifle the settlers would have had a heckfoa time settling the West, and the sourdoughs a heckofa time with Alaska/Yukon. Believe the hype about "super duper shoulder thumpers" all you want (marketers gotta eat to, eh?), I'll take a 30 WCF I can shoot over a 300 super ultra bonus magnum that jars my retina loose against any bull elk.

I didn't say that it lived. It just didn't die close enough for them to be able to recover it.

I shot a decent sized blacktail with a .30-30 at 70 yards. The bullet barely made it to the off side of the deer. My dad had the same results with deer he shot with the same round. Sure that's enough penetration to kill an elk but not enough to do it in a hurry and the farther away you are the less terminal performance you're going to get.

There are a lot better choices in weapons to hunt elk with.

Not trying to start an argument here SteelyEyes, but if that is the case, you had some bad ammo. When the .30-30 first came out,the standard factory load was a 160 Gr. bullet averaging 1,970 FPS. Now, I haven't asked you what the conditions were , or if the bullet contacted a large bone mass, but if not, the cartridge wasn't loaded correctly. I have been hunting my entire life, up until 2 years ago, with a .30-30. in that time, I have taken an average of three deer per year. Shots have ranged from 25-30 yards, to 130-140. that's my limit with open sights. So, an average number, I've killed approximately 60 in my life. I have had one (ONE), that is 1 deer that I had to track, and that was because I made a bad shot, and I knew it when I pulled the trigger. I could go into the larger game, rants about calibers, etc. But the fact is, there were men killing every north american big game animal in the US with .30-30's long before we were born. I'm willing to bet that the old .30-30 cartirdge and it's long list of kills in the almost 100 years it has been around doesn't really care what your opinion of it is. Makes me wonder...cartridge seemed to work fine for the riflemen that came before us. Maybe it isn't the cartridge. Maybe they just spent enough time with their rifles, in the woods, and shooting to know what their rifles would and wouldn't do, and they were just probably better riflemen than we are. So, yes, there are better rounds with which to kill elk now, but the old ones work just as good, providing you do your stuff. Just because the case isn't belted doesn't mean the cartridge won't perform. Doesn't matter what the continent, or cartridge, if you put the bullet in the right spot, the animal will die, every time.

Thanks MD. We all are just human beings. Anyone can miss or the animal can move just as you squeeze the trigger. Having a silver pen in hand doesn't make you infallible. I admire a writer that admits that they make mistakes. A bad hit is a bad hit whether from a 30/30 or 300 super zapper.

Interesting, though, that a lot people say to use the Nos Partition in the 30/30. 30/30 velocities are about ideal for the cup and core bullets usually used in it.

Actually, I once had a factory-load 150 RN from a .30-30 come apart on the shoulder of a doe whitetail. Admittedly a 170 probably would have done better, but the 170 Partition isn't a bad idea when hunting bigger game--and it sure enough works on deer as well.

Precisely.....


Casey

Oh yeah?--One of our wranglers used to use a M92 32-20 on elk--if the elk didn't stop, he'd ride it down on horseback, banging away the whole time until it fell down--then he'd deliver the coup de grace

Don't interpret that as being anti 30-30, that's the cartridge we keep handy at the back door of our high country cabin to discourage the frequent visits by blackies.........


Casey

I have seen too many elk killed with the 30-30 at ranges of around 200 yard to buy off on that...If he wounded and elk at 200 yards then he misplaced the shot or were not getting all the story...

I consider the 30-30 an excellent 200 yard elk killer on broadside shots with 170 gr. bullets of proper construction such as the old Corelokt...Keep in mind at 300 or 400 the 30-06 or at some point even the 300 magnums are nothing more than a 30-30, but that seems to be OK with the masses, including WZ??? Hmmmmmmmm!

Alpinecrick, I'm sorry but I don't buy the "running down wounded elk on horse back" story. Maybe a less dramatic version which goes something like "headed in the direction the wounded elk went and eventually getting lucky and finding it" would be more believable. I have spent most of my elk hunting career on horse back in the mountains, I have never been anywhere were you would have even a remote chance of taking a shot, getting back on your horse and chasing a wounded elk that's hauling ass up or down a mountain, through dead fall and timber and catching up.

Wayne should have borrowed Lee Hoots'.270WCF on those rascally elk at 200yards.

Those 170 Core-lokts leave little to be desired in the 30-30 in my opinion.



The moose which stopped these was around 90 yards distant when it took the one on the left in the forward ribcage area. A second bullet, not recovered, turned a section of the spine to mush at that same distance. The bullet pictured on the right was a close-up finisher; and even there it didn't come apart.

I've actually wished I had an open-sighted lever-gun rather than a scoped rifle while hunting elk.

I have to admit that in a field where credibility is your career, it takes a man to admit his mistakes. I think greatly of writers who are willing to write about things that go wrong. No one on the TV shows ever seems to show that hard parts of hunting or the things that go wrong. I think we get delusional about how hard hunting and shooting in the field can really be.

Personally I'd never use a 30-30 on elk at 200 yards, not much energy left. Took my first deer with one. Would consider it for thick woods, still hunting elk. But not 200 yards.

After reading a WVZ article about "Pet Loads For the 30-06" in which he spent a few words talking about a few loads but then stated he could not really comment on his "favorite" because he "Had not gotten to the range to shoot it yet" I stopped reading him.

Somehow, I do not feel shorted...

----------------
A couple years back I spent a rich couple hours talking to an elderly Native on Kodiak. He was lamenting the big magnums and talking about how the 30-30 used to be considered the BIG GUN for bears there.
art

Then why would you think this way. I ain't never hunted lion, and I ain't judging what folks use to do so.

The 303 Savage is the twin of the 30-30 and it was long regarded as a superb moose and elk round with a 190 gr bullet. I remember many old timers lamenting the passing of the 190 grainer.
As to the 600 yards shots with 30 wondermags: I have watched several experienced hunters make that mistake. The last one tracked a bleeding elk for 3 days and never got him. Know your limitations and the limitations of your equipment when you go afield.

"Keep in mind at 300 or 400 the 30-06 or at some point even the 300 magnums are nothing more than a 30-30, but that seems to be OK with the masses"

Not that it's the only source, but Federal's 2008 catalog lists one load for the 30-30: a 170 grain Nosler Partition with a muzzle velocity of 2200 ft/second. At 200 yards it has 990 foot pounds of energy.

They list seven 30-06 loads with more than 1000 foot pounds of energy at 500 yards; the most powerful being 1570 ft/lbs at 500 yards.

I think you'd need to be out past 600 yards before many of the 30-06 loads dropped to the 200 yard energy level of the 30-30.

That's not to imply that the 30-30 can't kill elk at 200 yards, however.

Just checked the numbers and the 270WSM with a 140 Accubond would have to go all the way out to 875 yards before it got to the 200 yard 30-30 level. No way I'd take a 875 yard shot at an elk, even if conditions were perfect. Just not enough power.

Had the Rangemaster (an honorary title for sure) at the local shooting range tell me the .30-30 is no good on deer at 200 yards.

He based this opinion on the effect a .30-30 bullet has on a steel silhouette at that distance and that it didn't seem to have enough energy to knock them over cleanly.

A friend related how he borrowed a 30 30 to hunt with while visiting and had close to a 200 yard shot at a deer. Knowing how 30 30 bullets fall out of the sky he aimed high.
He held high but on hair and spined the deer DRTing it with a nasty exit wound as well.
Basically he told me the story with a sense that people downplay the 30 30 as a weakling,which he believed, but after his experience they are FOS.

I have killed too many deer with a .30-30 to downplay it's abilities. Used within it's capability, it's a very good deer-killer. I have never used it on elk, but judging from what I have seen with deer, bear, pigs, etc., I wouldn't be afraid to. I have better-suited rifles, but if a .30WCF was all I had, I would have a go at it.

Sorta funny, everyone talking about energy and fps.
Hunting for meat took place for hundreds of years with nothing better than black powder and lead-lots of smoke, recoil, and veeeerrrryyyy slooowwww projectiles, but these were used, pretty commonly, and pretty effectively at ranges cited here.
If I recall correctly, most of the hoopla about the 30WCF was its flat trajectory-which, if compared to black n lead, was flat indeed. Pundits of the day were saying it was effective well past 200 yards.
Now, it may be possible that in a little over 100 years, Elk have begun donning kevlar, and can only be killed with super bullets and super velocity found in cutting edge bolt gun cartridges...then again, its also possible the Martians have landed.
The great thing about the 30WCF is that while a good bullet sure helps, its not the final word. Light weight, light recoil, power to drop game well beyond paper ballistics. These are why the 30WCF, and the carbines chambered for it, will always be popular.
Good luck, n good shootin.

Mak,

So is your choice of an open country elk rifle a 30-30? Of course people look at energy and fps. We are far more informed and educated about ballistics then people ever were back when it came out. Does a 30-30 work for elk? Absolutely. But it has limitations and we should know them, along with everything else we shoot. We know the 30-30 took tons of elk back in the day, but do you hear about the tons of elk that got away? Nope. Does it mean it didn't happen? Nope.

When you look at a caliber for your hunting, doesn't ballistics come into play? I imagine so.