Home Forums Lever Action Central Lever Actions - General .30-30 for elk

While thinking about this years coming deer and elk seasons I was considering what rifles and loads I would choose for the different areas I intend on hunting. I have a pre 64 M94 winchester that I love to hunt with and thought why not for elk in the 100 yd and closer shots. Any thoughts or suggestions?

I use to think they are not adequate, but compare the ballistics to a 44 mag that a lot of folks use in hand guns to down elk. If you can keep from trying to stretch out the distance and are confident in your ability, they sure won't bounce off an elk.

About the only trouble think you might have is if a big old bull or even a big cow comes running past you after it has just climbed a mountain or been shot at and the adrenaline has been worked up, It might not go down quickly, if you don't get a god shot placement. An elk walking around, not spooked or all riled up from rut is not all that hard to kill.

It might be a difffernt story if you have paid for a $3K hunt and traveled across the country to do so.

My last bull elk fell to a .30-30. It was about a 65 yard shot in the dark timber. He was facing me, uphill, at a slight angle. The bullet entered the front of his chest and angled towards his off side rear leg. He hit the ground hard and never even quivered. One shot kills are nice on bull elk, but I don't expect them. The old .30-30 will do just fine as long as a proper bullet is put in the right place, and the distance isn't too great.

Gary

MY GOD MAN!!!

Your not really gonna do this, you just wanted to get me all worked up right? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Seriously, i think it would work great with careful shot placement. But think seriously about getting some handloads worked up for the thing. Nosler makes a 165 grain roundnose partition for the 30-30 that im pretty sure would hold together a bit better and drive a little deeper than your deer loads. John Barness ("Mule Deer" on the board) talks about it for elk in my nosler manual. I think the factory loads are pretty much designed for deer size animals, and id just be afraid the bullet might tend to fragment if you had to drive through any bone. Remember, that bull might be 4x as big as the deer you have killed in the past. With hide and bones 4x as tough and a chest cavity twice as deep.

I think it would be cool to get a bull with your fine 30-30. Just dont tell my dad i said so. Especially dont tell your dad i said so! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Gary, what loads where you using and how did they perform? I assume you were able to recover the bullet. What condition was it in? And did you go through any bone? I'll only attempt this if I feel its a pretty safe venture. I havn't lost a big game animal yet and don't want to take any more chances than need be.

Thanks

SeanD,

I'm concernd about you. The very idea of hunting anything larger than a bunny with anything smaller than a 300 win mag is just not your style. What are you doing on the lever action forum anyway? You don't own any of those old fashioned antiquated lever guns. The actions probaly woudn't stand up to your handloads. We need to get that new Whelen up and running so you can get back to your old self.

I grew up on my Grandad's ranch in Parks County, Wyoming. Grandad didn't read much and he never knew that his 30-30 was considered inadequate by so-called experts for elk hunting. I didn't read much as a kid, so I was equally ignorant.

I killed my first two elk with Grandad's long barreled Winchester with the flip up tang sight. Winchester SUPER X 170 gr SilverTips were used. Each bull req'd two shots but they didn't get away.

My Dad used a 300 Savage all of his adult life. He was blind in his "shooting eye" from a detached retina when a horse kicked him as a child. Dad had a smith custom build a side mount scope outfit so he could aim with his left eye and shoot right handed. My Dad killed a whole lot of elk in his life with that rifle and many of them were at the distance from his muzzle that his bullet speed was travelling like a 30-30 bullet much closer.

I hunt elk with a BAR Sporter in .308 simply because the 30-30 does not have the "reach" I prefer. But at distances under 175 yards, the old 30-30 still slays elk each and every Fall. Don't think its a wounder. This old cartridge is a very good choice for most big game hunting when the distance is not too great and the first bullet can be placed directly into both lungs.
Buck

Matt,
I used a Hornady 170 and 3031. Couln't recover the bullet, it was in the "gut pile" somewhere. I was on a fairly steep slope and had a little bit of trouble just getting him gutted and quartered. I always like to try and find the bullet (bullets) if possible to see how they look - but just wasn't able to this time. No major bones were encountered. I go for lung/heart shots with this combination.

Gary

Hello from SW Montana,

I have been hunting elk & deer here since I was 12 (1968) except for a short time that I lived in Alaska. I have shot all of my elk or deer with a 30-30 or a 303 savage. I have many other rifles including flat shooting magnums but it get much more enjoyment out of the older lever actions. The 30-30 or 303 will do fine on elk if you practice so you are sure of shot placement and don't try to extend their range.

Sharps

Welcome to 24hour Sharps,

I have taken a fair number of deer with the 30 30 and have always been happy with the outcome. What I've been wondering about are specific bullets people have used on elk and how they performed. I feel pretty good about accuracy and my ability to get that rifle close enough to the target. If I use my 30 30 for elk I want to pick the best load for the job.

Always happy to listen

Use the 170 grain in the 30-30 - that is about all I use for all my 30-30 loads. for the 303 savage I use 180 and 190 grain.

An elk ain't a deer, first of all. Secondly, mos' hunters shoot farther with a rifle than they will try with a revolver. There is no doubt in my mind that a 30-30 will kill a elk unner the right circumstances. It is also a fact that during the demise of the herds in the early part of the 20th century, many an' ol' timer lost elk with poor 30-30 shots, an' some not so poor. My question is "why risk it"? Are elk not valuable to you? Are you too broke to buy an' '06? If you have to have a lever, why not use a 358? Usin' 30-30s on elk is a thing of a glutonous, non-conserving, bygone hunting heritage. Just like with DDT and various vermin poisons, we know better. Nobody starts out on the trail to wound an elk, and mos' never know they did it for sure. I like elk too much to say go ahead an' float yer boat. Get your priorities right, man! of course, this is just my opinion an' really don't mean nuthin' in the grand scheme of things, so nobody should take offense....... 'xsept those feable minded no-accounts thet shoot good animals with puny cartridges an' figur one or two wounded elk ain't worth the price of a new rifle.

30-30 for elk

muleskinner, i'm not picking on you, just clicked the reply button at your name.

i do agree with you muleskinner. i also have a question. i have read all kinds of talk on enough gun for elk. what i have found is this. no one can tell what is the one cartrige for elk. i do have a savage 99 in .308 is that enough ? if, and only if, one was within 50 yards of the said mr. elk or mrs. elk and had a 30-30 ? naw, best not set up a rare case when the above mentioned elk couple are in close. and the moon and stars were lined up just right and the old lucky charm was working and wore those favorite socks, type hunting days. naw, best not go there.

i do think of elk as the horse of the deer type family.

ok hunting freinds i agree with muleskinner get mo' better gun ! i still need to know what size ?

99savage308

keep the powder dry

get mo' better gun

FIRST; ELK AND MOOSE ARE DEER
SECOND; he didn't say he didn't want to buy a more expensive rifle.
Three; the .30/30 will kill elk.
Four; would you please take that UK logo off your posts, people may begin to think everyone from Kentucky is an opinionated, bull headed ass?!

30-30 for elk

hey, terry8mm,

man, a 30-30 will kill king kong also.

muleskinner was talking 'bout killing elk. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

and to think that U of K kicks arse when it comes to basketball tsk tsk tsk ..muleskinner man that had to hurt what terry8mm said i know i was hurt. hahaha

keep up the good posts this is way toooooo cool dudes.

99savage308

keep the powder dry

get mo' better gun

Muleskinner makes an excellent and important point. The question, ".30-30 for elk?" involves not only considerations of terminal ballistics and the ever-elusive "killing power," but also ethics. As hunters, we owe it to the animals that we hunt to pursue them with weapons that will dispatch them without needless suffering. An elk is also a very valuable natural resource, providing a great deal of food and hide for a hunter and his/her family, that we should do everything we possibly can to avoid wasting. Wounded, lost, and soured elk also reduce hunting possibilities for all of us. There are no superfluous elk!

That a .30-30 will kill elk is beyond dispute. Scores of thousands - perhaps many more - elk have been killed with well-held .30-30's over more than a century. That a well-constructed "premium" bullet of the Partition or bonded core type, from any one of a number of good manufacturers, "heavy" in weight for the cartridge (i.e 170-grainers most typically), is the best way to go is also rather well established. That the range should be kept short and shots directed into the "boiler room" are also elements of received wisdom.

It seems reasonable, given those caveats, to answer the question that started this interesting thread in the affirmative. Use the .30-30 if you are committed to it, but use it with eyes wide open to its limitations and with the willingness to pass up chancy shots.

But ... Is there really enough margin of reserve with the .30-30 to make its use truly ethical? Some will say, "Yes!" and I very much respect their opinions and their expertise. Those who stalk close and aim true with their .30-30's and .32 Specials are entitled to high praise. Far better such elk hunters than the gentry with the latest Thunderblaster Magnum who open up an ill-considered bombardment at long range and trust to a reserve of power to make up for want of hunting skill! Indeed, I also know of First Nations hunters in the Canadian North who will use the .30-30 on moose! But they are prepared, after shooting, to boil the billy and then start tracking.

For myself, living where an elk-hunting trip is a rare (and expensive) experience (a point already made in this thread) and knowing that "perfect" shots at elk are hard come by, a greater reserve of power, in addition to stalking carefully and taking only good shots, seems correct. If I blow it and wobble slightly off the point of aim or if the elk moves as the trigger is squeezed, I would prefer a bigger, heavier bullet, moving with more momentum than the .30-30 - fine as it is for its usual purposes - can generate.

This is a lever guns forum. Most lever guns are best at short and moderate ranges (though of course there are those that will "reach out"). I think a good lever is a superb weapon for hunting elk in heavy timber and thick cover. There, my experience - which is doubtless less than many on this board - teaches me that the old doctrine of the heavy bullet with "punch" and better - not infallible, I realize - ability to buck brush is what works best. I think that, with lever guns, we are largely talking about that sort of elk hunting - not long-range shooting in big clearings and "parks."

Therefore, among the old clasic lever cartridges, I personally prefer, to the .30-30, for elk hunting purposes, the .348 Winchester in the Model 71, the .35 Winchester and the .405 Winchester in the Model 1895 Winchester, and the .45-70 in Marlin 1895's and Winchester 1886's. Among the modern lever rounds, the .358 Winchester (as mentioned above) is a fine choice, as are the .450 Marlin, the .444, and the various "Alaskan" wildcats. The recent Miroku Model 1895 Winchesters in .270 and .30-06 can also be rechambered and rebored to .35 Whelen - another excellent elk cartridge. These powerful cartridges help - just help, not make anything and everything reasonable - if a quartering shot is a necessity or if bone is struck. None of them represent the terrific, sharp recoil of the big magnums (assuming a properly stocked .405!). The .35 Winchester, in particular, is a forgotten treasure.

Good luck to each and every elk hunter, using his or her chosen weapon! I believe that we can all agree that the weapon, while very important, is of less importance than the hunter's set of skills, judgement, and willingness to hunt hard and carefully.

May elk hunting endure to the Day of Judgement!

Redcoat


P.S. And I thought Muleskinner's "UK" stood for United Kingdom! Live & learn!

My dear Muleskinner,

After reading your spirited response to my proposed question I feel the need to reply. I notice you make mention of shot distance in your responce. In my original post I made clear that in the use of a .30/30 my shots would be kept to under 100 yds. I generally consider that my limit. Not because I can't hit a target at a greater distance but because getting close is what makes it exciting to me.

Why risk it you ask? I wouldn't consider it anymore of a risk than using a .300 mag at 300yds. Using a larger caliber will not make a bit of difference if you can't put the bullet where it belongs. I believe someone who thinks that they can reach out because they a big gun is likely to wound more game than someone goes out with the understanding in mind that this hunt will have to be close and bullet placement is of the utmost importence.

I've seen what a poorly placed '06 can do to a nice three point. That hunter took a poor shot at moving target at too great a distance. Fortunately I was there to get within 40 feet of that buck and put a bullet through its neck. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Sparing what was left of the meat.

So settle down Muleskinner I was just asking an innocent question. I would never take a chance that I didn't feel was more than just a little in my favour.

Sorry folks,
I normally try not to be rude but, I get "riled" about some issues.
You can tell someone you don't agree with them, without being an ass, as I was.

Everyone is not an incompetent boob, as obviously "Skinner and others that hunt and deal with guns for a living , have had to put up with and babby sit over the years.

I personally, scouted my own hunting sites and took a nice muley and elk the first year I hunted Colorado, with a recurve bow.

After a couple of trips I decided to try gun season to avoid some of the "nature lover" types that seemed to follow me everywhere.

The day I killed my first elk with a rifle (with my old .30-30 Marlin) there was a perfectly sighted, m70/.300 mag behind the truck seat, that I didn't feel I need in the "blowdown" hell hole I was hunting.

I never did"blood" that rifle, traded it on a Browning shotgun.


My point, just because someone doesn't shoot the same rifle with the same scope as someone else, doesn't make them an idiot or a free target for flaming.

lecture over, mea culpa

Things were different back when I was kid hunting with Grandad in the Bighorns of north central Wyoming. We hunted on Grandad's leased grazing lands from the Forest Service. No one else hunted there because 4 wheelers had not been invented yet. Modern affordable air travel was in its infancy. Trains did not stop anywhere near our hunting grounds.

The elk herds were not spooky like they are now. Currently, archers get them spooked a full month before rifle season opens.

Ranchers now "rent" their leased grazing lands to hunting clubs from back east. Plenty of elk hunters in the Bighorns in 2002 and beyond.

In conclusion, the 30-30 is a very good big game hunting cartridge. But it does not have the reach I need for my elk hunting. Times have changed and I changed with them. I use a BAR in .308 and I generally shoot twice before the animal topples over. This super accurate cartridge is deadly out to 300 yards or so.

Most of my cousins in Wyoming hunt elk each year with 30-06 or 7mm MAG rifles. These are good choices because of their "reach". Your 30-30 will let you down someday if the only shot at a bull you get is beyond its ideal effective range.
Buck

Your 308 will let you down someday if the only shot at a bull you get is beyond its ideal effective range.

I've been hunting elk with a .308 for over 30 years without losing a single animal. If you're suggesting my .308 is inadequate then you obviously have not used this cartridge enough to admire its accurasy and knock down power. Nor can you make a viable agruement against historical facts.

My Dad (age 81) killed a stack of Wyoming elk with his 300 Savage rifle. Yet he never felt under gunned either.

Just because Jim Carmichael and Craig Boddington claim 338 MAG is minimum for elk does not make it so. Neither journalist has ever lived in Wyoming. FACT: Their hunts are guided every step of the way and paid for by big ad sponsers in the magazines they write for.

Any animal shot twice with the .308 has more area of wound channel damage than one shot with a 338 MAG. Do the math or study wound channels if you dis-believe me.

I'm not angry with you, simply stating the facts. Good elk hunting to you.
Buck

Just pointing out that the statement you made about the 30-30 could be made about your 308, or any cartridge for that matter. You must know, and abide by your limits. If you do, the 30-30, or your 308 will not fail you.
I hunt moose with a 308, but one of our guys has used a 30-30 to do the job for better than fourty years. He's good with it, and he's proven it works, dead moose after dead moose.
I'm afraid I have less faith in gun writers than even you, and even less in paper ballistics, and artificial wound channels. Results speak volumes. The 30-30 continues to work.
Here's an example from Lyman's cast bullet handbook
They got a 30-30 cast bullet to out penetrate a 30-06 factory load in ballistic gelatin. What exactly did that prove? That it works, in ballistic gelatin, not in the real world.
Shoot end to end through a white tail deer at 20 yards with a 30-30? Surprizingly, yes, I have. Not with their fancy #2 alloy cast bullet, but with a bullet cast from common wheelweights, and hardened by dropping in water. Real world performance, bullet not recovered, deer with very messy cleaning job, very dead.

John,

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I'm glad you have had good success with your .308, too. I shot only one mooose with my .308 and used 180 grain round nosed Remington core-loct ammo. Distance was approx. 175 yards or so. First bullet had no effect. After the second shot the bull stumbled, then trotted away. But we heard him topple over just a few seconds later. We waited 20 minutes and approached the colossal beast. He was dead as Julius Caesar. Both bullets struck within my open hand length of each other. The inside of his chest cavity looked like he swallowed a grenade.

I knew an old trapper who lived near Colony, Wyoming when I was a young man. His name was Harry. He killed elk every year with an antique 99 Savage rilfe in 303 caliber. Harry always shot twice. His choice of rifles reflected his theory that multiple hits equals a very dead animal. Harry claimed the 190 gr bullet was better for elk than 170 gr bullet in 30-30. Since he had used both, I assumed he knew what he what talking about.

In conclusion, a good hunter with patience to wait for the right angle will do okay with just about any big game cartridge. Animals are killed by well placed big game bullets that destroy vital organs. Animals are wounded by poorly placed shots that damage less vital organs or muscle tissue. Ballistic charts are helpful. But they do not provide a mathematical explanation for lethality when shot placement is ideal!

Good moose hunting to you.
Buck

I tell this story about once every year but it is a good one and bears repeating.

In 1976 I was attending USU in Logan, UT. There was a small informal rifle range in the canyon along US 89 between Logan and Ogden. One day before hunting season there was half a dozen shooters at this range sighting in our rifles. We all had scoped somethings; 06's and .270's mostly, I happened to be using a Ruger #1 .25-06. We were all shooting over rests of some kind and making those last half inch scope adjustments to get the groups j-u-s-t right.

About halfway through the shooting session this old beat up green pickup pulls up, probably a late fifties vintage. An old man and woman were in the front seat. The old man gets out of the pickup and he is an �Old Timer� right out of central casting � sweat stained hat, red neckerchief, three day grey stubble, could be in his late seventies or perhaps just real weather beaten sixties. He goes down range and sets up a cardboard box about the size that might have held a console TV or maybe even a dishwasher. No aiming point or target, just the box. He walks back down to the firing line and fires three shots off hand from a Winchester Model 94 .30-30 as seasoned and worn as he was. When he brings the box back to the firing line there is a roughly triangular group about 12� across right in the middle of the box. �See there, Martha�, he says to the woman in the truck, �she�s still shootin� where she was last year.� He gets in the truck and off he drives.

When I was heading back to Logan I passed a small ranch and barn, and in the front yard of that ranch house was that same old beat up green pickup. Nailed to the front of the barn were more deer and elk antlers than I could count in the few seconds it took to drive by. Suffice to say the whole front of the barn was covered.

Circumstantial evidence to be sure. Maybe all those elk were shot with a .300 Win. Mag and a high powered Leupold scope, but I doubt it.

Is a .30-30 good enough for elk? I think the hunter is more important than which rifle he uses. I am often reminded of that old saying attributed to an Indian guide I read in a Gun Digest many years ago, �any gun good gun, shootum good�.

Ain't this the type of post where everyone gets really nasty and defensive? Hasn't really happened yet...that's great.

100 yards and in with a 30-30 you've hunted with alot and shoot very well? I'd load that sucker with Nosler Partitions and make sure I had a very sharp knife.

This is, however, the perfect justification to go out and splurge on that Marlin 1895 45/70.
You know you want it! Don't lie!

I know I want one...handled one in the shop today. Long barrel ballard rifled model with crisp checkering and nice walnut. I could taste that crisp mountain air and see that big bull blowing steam out his nostrils. Quick, he's looking the other way...gotta bring this Marlin to bear......BOOOOOOM....where's my bowie?

I really do want one. But that is besides the point. I really want one or two of each. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

What ELK loads for a .30/30? 170 grain bullets are the preferred choice. If actually putting a lot of pre-planning and forethought into it; get a couple boxes of CoreLokt soft points, hollow point CoreLokt, Silvertip, and Nosler Partition and see if any of them display any signifigant accuracy advantages over the other. The Silvertip and the CoreLokt soft point will likely prove the "softest" of the bunch with the hollow point CoreLokt and the Partition giving the best penetration potential. For the most part however, about any 170 grain bullet will run out of velocity after impact before it runs out of bullet integrity. Penetration of various 170's will likely only differ by only small amounts. Shoot well, eat well. AW

I have no problem with the 30-30 and do feel that the levergun is the only way to go. If our forefathers used them than why not us? I like the challenge. Do however consider a lever with a bigger bore. The current 444, 450, and 45-70's are outstanding and will drop your elk in its tracks. While on the subject, if you are in to nostalgia try a 307 Winchester.

LeverMan
Life is too short to shoot anything but a LeverGun!

I've always found it interesting that HUNTING Magazine ALWAYS favors the biggest cartridge for game. For example, they recommended 44 MAG for deer for couple decades but know its the 454 Casull. For elk it must be a 338 MAG or a Weatherby cartridge. For deer it must be the latest and greatest bolt action something or other.

But all these articles amount to so much barnyard compost after all. If we believe everything we read it goes like this: Shoot a deer with a 44 MAG revolver and he bites the dust. But shoot him with a rifle and it better be something way more powerful or else the deer will simply be tickled as the bullet bounces off! Shoot that buck with a 50 caliber muzzle-loader and he will topple. But make the same shot at the same distance with a 30-30 and supposedly the deer will get away wounded.

In my opinion, the 30-30 is lethal way beyond 50 caliber muzzle-loader distance or 454 Casull for that matter. But you'll never read this fact in HUNTING Magazine!
Buck

Lever Lad I would very much like to get a 45-70 but am a little put off by Marlins guide guns. I would like a longer barrel on one and I would think the ported muzzle would bust ear drums. Who else is make 45-70 lever guns? I havn't head of any lately.

Muleskinner if it makes you feel better I went out and got me a 30/40 Krag. Now I can really reach out and swat those elk good.

Hell boys, I'm losin' sleep 'bout all the nice bulls gonna get 30-30 bullets in their paunch next season. I tell you what, anybody cain't afford anythin' but a 30-30 to take on their $3,000 elk hunt can come to my house, an' I'll loan them my .348 for the season. Jus' leave me yer 30-30, an' maybe a small child yer wife is fond of, an' you can take my M71 to put a proper thumpin' on a wapiti.

Mule skinner:

.348 is one of those cartridges that has a small but loyal following. But the 71 is difficult to make precison hits at long range. The open sights are simply inadequate for long shots past, say, 175 yards. I owned one briefly in the early 19070's but sold it because of the fierce recoil and 4 inch groups at 100 yards. I prefer my automatic Browning in .308 with 2X-7X scope!

Why Marlin has ignored this .348 cartridge is beyond my comprehension. Seems to me that it would outsell their 444.

Buck

You solt a 71?! Poor boy. 4" groups? Hell, you didn't have to sell 'er, jus' grow a pair, or go sneak 'em outta yer wife's purse afor you go shootin'! My 348 shoots 1.25" groups with peepers. Learn to shoot a 348 with a metal buttplate, an' shootin' good groups with other cartridges becomes a breeze. You jus' gotta have the right attitude. M71 is the smoothest, tightest, best-made levergun to come down the pipe. I won't hesitate to shoot 200 yds. Ain't fer everbody, though. Wimmins, novice hunters, an' girlie boys ain't apt to be good with a M71. That's why there's such a limited group of owners. M71 hunters are borned, not made.

Sold a 348? Still critize Mule for only havin a M71 not an original W71 . I passionately defend my right to shoot anything in N America with a 348... and with open sights. Something I cannot say about my 30-30 or my 35 Rem. I like and respect 356/358 cartride as well.
\
200 +_ yds well mostly in my dreams as I make my own hunts and ask my friends no scope is gonna make a diff. But a 30-30?? not unless ya got nothing else. Sorry!

And I plan to spend a bundle opn my fall hunt and it will be with the 348 and 30-06 Win 70 with 4X Nikon as a back up also has iron sights.



bc

Kinda plucky fer a cannuck. I reckin' me an' my 1986 M71 ain't fit to stomp the same ground with an ORIGINAL M71 toter. Course, them older guns is charmin', but there's sumthin' to be said fer new metal. As young a pup you are, bc, yer apt to wear thet ol' gun out an' have to buy 'nother M71. Hope you ain't too sour on the Brownings, 'cause there ain't so many of them original M71s to replace it with. Now mine, will probly las' this ol' coon long enuff, an' probly outlast my boy too. So waller in yer glory of havin' a original M71 while you can, afor the old metal in the barrel starts openin' up them groups an' you gotta think 'bout retirin' it an' gettin' a new, tight shootin' Browning.

Mule
real nice to reply to this young pups post. I guess this old W 71 will last my lifetime and that of my sons. Actually this will be my first year to cut my teeth on this ultimate lever cartridge. Ever use hawk 270 gr. in yours??
2004 got some plans ....keep your calendar open, like your sights.

bc

Wassamatta, the 250s didn't kick you hard enuff? I reckin' I'll stick with the ol' reliable 200s. Got way too many of 'em to switch bullets. They kick me hard enuff. I reckin' yer jus' a glutton fer punishment. Here's a hint: the 348 ain't really a musk ox cartridge, jus' feels like one.

Muleskinner in addition to a 348 do I also need a 3000.00 dollar guide to kill elk? I thought all I needed were a rifle and good hunting skills. But if you think big rifles and a guide are necessary its probaly best you stick with them. Good luck this season!

Best thing 'bout the 348, either old or new, its got a metal buttplate to whack folks what need it up aside their haid. A guide don't cost $3,000. Thet's the cost of yer horse, yer bed, an' yer meals. The guide would be happy with $300 for a week's worth of totin' yer sorry arse 'round the mountings. You ever lived off $300 a week? Mos' dudes don't even tip that. Reminds me why I got outta that business. Ask yer wife if she feels appreciated. I doubt yer guide will feel any differnt.

Skinner,
Why would a guy that lives on the oregon coast need $3000 dollars to go kill an elk? Before i found this forum, it had never occured to me that lots of guys think thats what elk hunting is, an expensive hunt that takes a bunch of money, and a fancy new rifle to do the job. Amazing. I guess im just lucky, $300 more than covers my cost. I realize lots of folks have more money than skill, and a guided hunt may be what they want, or even what the need to kill an elk.

For me, and a lot of us, paying a guide to show us an elk to kill would just take away from the experience. Elk hunting is hard work, but hunting is about personal accomplishment, and hunting and killing one alone by yourself, for me at least, is part of what makes the experience so worthwhile. Im not trying to put down all the guys that use a guide for thier elk hunts, but I do think its funny that you would just assume a guy asking for peoples experiences with a certain caliber for elk hunting means he spent all his money on an outfitter and cant afford a new elk gun cuz hes dont have any dough left. Guess thats what you get when you ask the "experts". It was nice of you to offer the 348 though, even if it does require a fat pocketbook to hire a guide as a prerequisite.

Geez Matt, why dont you just go out and buy a new 30.06, since you obviously dont have one? ONE being the key word here. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> A guy cant have too many of the same caliber you know!

Sean,
I would feel the same way. But as you said, many need and want it. The state requires it (in wilderness areas), partially for safety, partially to protect an important industry and source of jobs. Same way with timber in Washington, steel in Pennsylvania. No need to take it out on the poor slobs at the bottom of the food chain. Some fellers want you to show 'em a big bull, get 'em close, call it in, an' field dress an' quarter it. Some fellers want you to take a back seat an' jus' get them in the neighborhood. Some start out the first way, then change after a few days of frustration. Some fellers will get themselves in on bulls that mos' others would take in a New York second, only to pass 'cause gettin' there is where the fun is. I had some wonnerful fellers from Oregon las' season. They hunted big open country with 340 Weatherbys, mosly for cows. Shootin' a bull inside 50 yards was a dream come true, an' they were a joy to hunt with. Had they known the country an' a lil' 'bout horses, they woulda been fine (and successful) without me. Well, with a lil' instruction 'bout stalkin' thet is.

Will the .30-30 kill Elk with one well placed shot? You bet! Is it ideal? No.

Noted writer Jack O'Conner in his book "The Hunting Rifle" (Winchester Press, 1970) stated that a good careful shot who uses a properly constructed bullet could knock off just about anything with the .30-30. He mentioned a western hunter who said that if he didn't get 17 to 18 elk with a box of .30-30 cartridges, he thought he was doing poorly.

If one is spending big $$$ to go on an Elk hunt of limited duration, make mine a .338 Win Mag. please. On the other hand, if one lives in Elk Country and wants to put the "hunt" back in to hunting, gets in close and places his or her shot in the killing zone, the .30-30 will work all right with the right bullets.

Interestingly, in testing done by Clyde "Snooky" Williamson in his excellent book "WINCHESTER LEVER LEGACY", a 170 gr. Nosler bullet fired from a .30-30 penetrated to the exact same depth in red clay as a 250 gr. Barnes fired from a .348! Now that's saying something!

Both cartridges would produce life extinguishing wound channels. The .348's would be larger but not any deeper using these very good bullets.

Seems as if the old .30-30 has more power than paper ballistics would have you believe!

w30wcf
aka Jack Christian SASS #11993 "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me." Philippians 4:13
aka John Kort
life member NRA
.22 W.C.F / .30 W.C.F. / .44 W.C.F. cartridge historian

What? I don't buy it, but even if it were true, the energy from a 250 grain Barnes movin' at 2200 fps would be much more than a 170 grainer movin' at the same speed or less. Even if the penetration was the same, its like bein' penetrated to equal depths by a pencil or a baseball bat.

ouch.

MCRORoutdoorsman - I've never done exactly what you're talking about, but I killed my last little bull with a .300Sav and a light 165gr Hornady load, even though it's not enough gun. And the 6pt before that was with a Remington .45-70 factory slowpoke load, even though anything short of 1900fps will bounce off an elk. I'd say load a 170gr bullet and go for it, just do it properly. Of course, every elk you see won't necessarily be "your" elk. You know what I mean. I plan on doing the same thing one of these times. -al

How about this?
Yep it will work.
Nope, it ain't the best choice.

Nuff said?

MRCOR - You mentioned a while ago that you wanted a .45-70 but didn't like the short, ported guide guns. There are a lot of the earlier Marlin 1895 models out there on the market, starting in 1972, that have 22" barrels. Mine is a '72 with an uncheckered straight stock and cut rifling. It's the perfect rifle for elk hunting in the trees. It's light and easy to carry. Load it with a 405gr bullet and it'll shoot through an elk lengthwise. Keep the velocity down around 1500-1600fps and it's a pleasure to shoot, even at only 7 lbs. I highly recommend it for someone like you who seems to share my passion for that sort of thing. -al

I forgot one other thing. I shot through a mulie buck (about 175 lbs) just about end to end one time with a 150gr Hornady in .30-30. He was facing me at about 50yds, and the bullet went in the chest and exited the back just in front of the pelvis, leaving an exit wound about 2" wide (and taking a couple good steaks with it). Not too shabby for just a 150. Penetration like that oughta kill an elk just fine. -al

The new Marlin Guide Guns have a 20" non-ported barrel. They left the porting on the hangun cartridge models, and removed it from the 45-70, 450 Marlin, 444 models. Good example of a company listening to its customers. Now if they'd jus' do as much with that dam hammer block safety. Sumthin' tells me the lawyers talk much louder.

Muleskinner,

The comparison would be more like two Baseball bats, a .308" and a .348" one. The .348 w/ 250 gr. Barnes bullet would produce a somewhat larger wound channel but the .30-30 using the 170 gr. Partition bullet would not lack for penetration.

The penetration and size of the wound channel is what harvests game, not kenetic energy. The larger wound channel made by the .348 would be desireable for harvesting larger game, but Jack O'Conner said it right.

w30wcf

The wound channel may do the killin', but the energy's what's gonna incapacitate. A daid animal don't do you no good if its a mile off when it succombs. Asides, the 170 is more apt to be in pieces after the first roast than a 250, so no similar wound channel is guaranteed. I shoot 200s from my M71. I guarantee it will put a hurtin' on a critter at a level no 30-30 can hope to match. Don't kid yerself. Its a black powder cartridge fer christ sakes.

Mule.
In your last post you referred to either the .348 or the .30/30 as a "black powder" cartridge. Which one did you mean? Yeah, I'm a bit confused....I musta missed something somewhere.AW

Skinner please!! Energy incapacitates, but the wound channel does the killing? The wound channel that does the killing isnt responsible for the incapacitation? What? And the 170 grain bullet is going to break up when the 250 is not? Given equal bullet constuction, the slower 170 will break up less, not more, if the velocity is less. High velocity is the enemy to bullet integrity, and slower bullets also tend to penatrate more. Ill take the big hole from the 250 grainer, and it will put the animal down faster, i agree, but that because its a bigger hole and more damage, not because of energy. If it was energy, why not get a 7 STW or ultramag instead of the 348 or 35 with the slower bullets and less energy?

A heavy bullet will create more hydrostatic shock and bust up bone an' muscle over a wider area as it penetrates. Knock down power. A 223 fmj will penetrate. Why not jus' shoot elk with a 223? Because, you want to incapacitate at the moment of the shot, not 3 hours later.

I have looked in quite a few dead elk, and you know I have never seen any energy lying around, but I have seen some mighty big wound channels. A close analogy, A 800 lb bull elk hit with a 500 grain arrow that cuts a minimum wound channel, produces hardly any hydrostatic shock , and has hardly any knetic energy to impart to the animal will usaully sucumb in less than 100 yds if hit correctly. A 30-30, 170 gr bullet placed in the same location will do the same job.

An elk hit in the ass with a 300+ Oh my God shoulder thumping magnum will usually succomb to gangrene before it dies of the shock.

I'm not sure about now, but 10 years ago or so, the world record boone and crocket typical elk AND non-typical elk were BOTH killed with none other than 30-30's........FYI <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Muleskinner,

Thank you for your response. F.Y.I. Beginning in 1891, Winchester sought to develop a smokleless powder only cartridge to carry their W.C.F. designation. When their new .30W.C.F. cartridge debuted in 1895 in their 1894 Winchester rifle, it was specifically labeled as the .30 Winchester Smokeless. Marlin/U.M.C. named it the .30-30 which also was a smokeless only cartridge but they used a blackpowder designation. In this case the -30 meant 30 grains of smokeless powder instead of b.p.

I totally agree with JohnD and saddlesore. Tee, thank you for the info on the .30-30 and those big elk.

A 170 gr. .30 caliber bullet has a sectional density of .256. By comparison, a 200 gr. 348 bullet has a sectional density of .236 or a little over 8% less. All other things being equal (bullet construction, velocity on impact, etc.), bullets with higher sectional density's will penetrate more than bullets with lesser ones.

A .223 55 gr. bullet has a sectional density of .153. A fmj bullet will penetrate since there is no bullet upset and will produce a very small wound channel unless it tumbles. An expanding .223 bullet would be lacking on penetration due to its lower sectional density and higher velocity.

A .348 200 gr. bullet starts out 350 f.p.s. faster than a 170 gr. from the .30-30. Bullet construction being equal, it will produce a bigger wound channel, but not a deeper one. In addition, the .348's higher impact velocity w/ 200 gr. bullets will do somewhat more damage to tissue outside of the wound channel which is a plus to incapacitating a game animal.

If foot lbs of energy were the only criteria to downing a big game animal, which would you hunt buffalo with, a .243 or a .45-70? The .243 has higher kinetic energy, but the .45-70 and its kin have a reputation for getting the job done well on bigger game.

Take care,
w30wcf

I sent some of my 348 handloads to a feller that has a scope mounted on his M71. I know, it ain't proper, but he used that rig to plug a cow at over 200 yards and got fine performance from the bullet. Ain't no 30-30 load on earth gonna be a reliable 200 yard elk round.