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

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.