Reloader's Nest Forum
Reloader's Nest Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 Reloading General
 General forum
 Does anyone else despise the .30-30?

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List
   
Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

 
   

T O P I C    R E V I E W
n/a Posted - Apr 27 2012 : 23:58:32
I just absolutely hate the .30-30. Am I the only one? I just don't see its usefulness. There are so many cartridges just as old that are so much more efficient. It doesn't hit hard, it has a rainbow trajectory, it is loud, and it kicks like a pissed off mule. I know, it has killed more deer than probably any other cartridge; but, it has probably missed and wounded more deer than any other cartridge also. I have nothing against lever actions, however, the Model 94 is not high on my list. But, the Marlin 336 is another story. The Marlin in .35 Remington is way ahead of anything in the .30-30. Why it is still popular is totally beyond me. When I was in my teens, I missed the largest buck I have ever seen in the wilds with a '94 in .30-30. I then got a .243 and never missed again. Should I blame that on the .30-30? Probably not, but I do anyway. To me it is the cartridge of the uninformed western movie fan, and not of the serious hunter and shooter. If I have offended any .30-30 fans, please tell me why you are attracted to it and maybe I'll change my mind some, but I doubt it.
7x57guy
15   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Wolfgang Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 07:52:19
quote:
Originally posted by scottd5194

Interesting read... I think the 30/30 is a great match for traditional low tech bullets, I have seen them drop a moose, of course YOU have to place the shot well!
If you aren't satisfied with the performance of the 30/30 then either you are using it for something it was never intended for ( long range) or trying to make shots you aren't capable of making... either way it's not the 30/30s fault... sorry....IMO...



If you don't place the shot right it doesn't matter if you're pushing a .30-30 or a .600NE. Many moons ago I had a Stevens 325 bolt-action, Savage 219 (I think?) single-shot with matching 12ga bbl, Win 94 and a Marlin 336. The bolt & single were both more than capable shooting plenty accurate at 200+yds. The best bullet for general hunting (WT's, hogs, ect) was the Nosler 150gr BTFN but some brainchild at Nosler decided it wasn't sexy enough so they stopped making it. For varmints the Stevens liked the little Sierra 110gr HP.
scottd5194 Posted - Sep 12 2012 : 21:49:37
Interesting read... I think the 30/30 is a great match for traditional low tech bullets, I have seen them drop a moose, of course YOU have to place the shot well!
If you aren't satisfied with the performance of the 30/30 then either you are using it for something it was never intended for ( long range) or trying to make shots you aren't capable of making... either way it's not the 30/30s fault... sorry....IMO...
nachogrande Posted - Sep 04 2012 : 18:07:15
let me get this straight, you feel more recoil from a win 94 in 30-30, than a guide gun in 45-70? well I guess everyone percieves recoil differently. stick with the guide gun.
renegade Posted - Sep 03 2012 : 20:32:26
In my opinion the 30-30 is ok, just some of the guns chambered for it are a problem. No it doesn't recoil that hard but in a mod 94 given the stock dimensions it bothers me MORE than my .416 Rem in a Ruger Mod 77 african. That skinny small stock just beats the H out of my shoulder. I also have a Marlin Guide Gun in 45/70 that doesn't hurt like the 94, so it really isn't the 30-30 but the guns it comes in.
Wolfgang Posted - Jun 09 2012 : 21:48:53
Nach,
Soon as I get some time to look for them and take some pic's I'll post them. Thin-skinned and little resistance, like a lung shot, and the Foster style slugs will generally do okay ... when they hit anything that puts up some resistance, they're done for in the penetration department. The design is half of the problem, the dead-soft lead is the other half. The Lee mold is probably the best design going for a Foster because of the added support provided by the "key", cast them from WW alloy and paper patch them ... I shouldn't say that because some schmuck will go flower-petal their barrel and try to blame me.

Anyway, even the Lee key isn't anywhere near a round ball for density. Even soft-cast balls will waaaaay out penetrate any slug, including one that's heavier than the ball.
nachogrande Posted - Jun 08 2012 : 21:03:16
never had a slug of any kind not perform well,mostly against whiyetail at close range and 1 hog. 100% pass thru's & big holes/blood trais. a 1 ounce pill is kinda hard to swallow in any shape. but a hardened ball would have more contact surface area,penetration and hydrostatic shock? am I on the right track? curious and would honestly like to know advantages of balls vs slugs.
n/a Posted - Jun 08 2012 : 10:07:10
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang

quote:
Originally posted by Galen

Why is there a huge difference between the ball and the slug? They both are going to create a devastating wound channel.



Obviously you've never been facing an angry boar who was pushed to being totally PO'ed by a slug at <20'. With the exception of a scarce few designs like Prokhorov and Mayer, slugs suck and none more so than the Foster style and all variations of it. Penetration on anything that offers more than minimal resistance is dismal. I'll be happy to post some pic's as soon as I find the fired slugs showing how the Foster style flattens-out on impact and didn't even penetrate 2" into wet sand while round balls from the same gun at the same range penetrated >10". The disproportional wasp-waist slugs like the paper-patched Kintzelbach and Tallinn sabot perform better than the Foster style but still lack reliable consitent penetration because of their tendency to tumble after impact. Round balls have consistently produced the deepest penetration combined with the most consistent wound channels - such is why the slug-fad of the late 19th century fizzled out quickly and round balls remained dominant until sales-hype became the primary focus in the 1950's.





Sounds like the Foster type slugs are like some fishing lures; i.e., they are made to sell the fisherman rather than to actually catch fish.
7x57guy
Wolfgang Posted - Jun 08 2012 : 09:20:48
quote:
Originally posted by Galen

Why is there a huge difference between the ball and the slug? They both are going to create a devastating wound channel.



Obviously you've never been facing an angry boar who was pushed to being totally PO'ed by a slug at <20'. With the exception of a scarce few designs like Prokhorov and Mayer, slugs suck and none more so than the Foster style and all variations of it. Penetration on anything that offers more than minimal resistance is dismal. I'll be happy to post some pic's as soon as I find the fired slugs showing how the Foster style flattens-out on impact and didn't even penetrate 2" into wet sand while round balls from the same gun at the same range penetrated >10". The disproportional wasp-waist slugs like the paper-patched Kintzelbach and Tallinn sabot perform better than the Foster style but still lack reliable consitent penetration because of their tendency to tumble after impact. Round balls have consistently produced the deepest penetration combined with the most consistent wound channels - such is why the slug-fad of the late 19th century fizzled out quickly and round balls remained dominant until sales-hype became the primary focus in the 1950's.
Galen Posted - Jun 07 2012 : 15:37:35
Why is there a huge difference between the ball and the slug? They both are going to create a devastating wound channel.
Mike70560 Posted - Jun 07 2012 : 13:52:50
quote:
Originally posted by txstevel

However most people only know what someone has told them or they have read.


There is an awful lot of that around...
txstevel Posted - Jun 05 2012 : 11:06:17
This is great stuff guys! I agree about the gun rags. I agree to the destructive force delivered by a pound of lead moving near the speed of sound. However most people only know what someone has told them or they have read. From this they will run out and buy the recomended rifle in the recomended caliber, shoot it one weekend before season opens, get lucky, then that makes it law by them. Face it, if there weren't people that were easily influenced out there a lot of guy's out there wouldn't have girls. My grandfather lived his life out in the east Tennessee mountains and only ever had a single shot .22 and a double barrel 12ga. Raised and fed "16" children so he obviously didn't have to spend all his time in the woods doing it. Thanks for all your thoughts and honesty.
Wolfgang Posted - Jun 04 2012 : 10:28:33
OH, there's a HUGE difference between a "slug" and a "round ball".
nachogrande Posted - Jun 04 2012 : 09:35:04
10-4 on that. if something doen't drop to a shotgun slug at point blank to 25 yds, then it's time to haul azz.
Wolfgang Posted - Jun 04 2012 : 09:14:20
Yep, I carry 12ga ammo with 0.650" 400gr round ball MV 1350-1420 depending on bbl length. This is a compromise as they'll run through chokes. Loading my own I used a 0.715" WW alloy patched round ball but only for cylinder bores - they're absolutely brutal though, within their working range, ain't much in a closed-breech shoulder-fired gun that's going to do better. Folks talk about all kinds of fancy stuff for SD on nasty critters but them bog ole round balls are still the best.
nachogrande Posted - Jun 04 2012 : 08:08:45
things have kinda come full circle. a firm in FL, DIXIE SLUGS are making ammo harkening back to the old black powder days of Africa and India by making a 12 ga TRI-BAL round that in 3 1/2" shoots 3 60+ caliber balls each over 300 grs moving at 1100 fps in 3 1/2" and 1000 fps in 3". they are a cast bullet (very hard) their own formula of lead, antimony and something else I forget. total payload 2 oz. haven't hit an animal with one yet but judging by what they do to my shoulder, inside of 40 yds, I bet they would be devastating on just about anything. I got them for hogs in heavy brush when using a shotgun.

Reloader's Nest Forum © 2013 ReloadersNest Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.06 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.06