.30-.30 lever action

R

RHC

New member
I'm headed for a gun show today and I'm interested in maybe picking up something in the Winchester 1894 class in .30-.30.
What should I look for (and look out for?)
What about pistol-caliber lever actions? I've never had a rifle in those calibers.
Do you give up a lot of power?

------------------
"...where the wind comes sweeping down the plains..."
 
RHC, I'll admit that I'm no expert on the subject, but do have my opinion. The .30-.30 is a fine versatile round and is fairly inexpensive. You'll likely love it forever.
My own personal favorite is the Marlin .357, but the power isn't there like the .30-.30. That's why I soon plan to biggie-size to the .45-70. (I have seen .45-70 pistols, just in case that's a consideration for you). ;)
 
The loss of "power" depends on the range you are firing. The larger psitol calibers (.44 mag./.45LC) arguably provide greater power out to 100 yards. Opinions on which lever gun is better varies. In .30-30 it is a wash between Marlin and Winchester. However in the pistol calibers I prefer the Marlin. The shorter action is just more smooth.


------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
 
The age-old question: "Whatcha gonna do with it?"

For deer-hunting, the .30-30 is better. The .44 Mag or .45 Colt will work for deer, but your range is limited for a sure, clean kill.

For general fun, plinking and such, the pistol cartridges are better--particularly if you reload. More useful for home defense, for that matter.

Aw, shucks, buy one of each!

:), Art
 
Presonal preference-
Pre '64 M94 Winchester w/peep sights. Fun to shoot and can still find some decennt deals on a pre '64 Win. Nothing against Marlin, because I also shoot a 35 Rem in a 336CS (also w/peeps). Haven't kept up with gun show prices, but my guess is you will be able to find a good P'64 for the price of a new Winchester or Marlin??? Either way, you won't go wrong. Good luck!
Cris
 
In 1964 Winchester changed a lot of its products, mostly to cut production costs. The Model 70 rifle was changed drastically, and a myth developed that the old ones were of much greater quality than the new. A little truth to it for a few years, then Winchester quality returned to near normal.

Other Winchester products were also affected, more stamped parts, instead of machined,etc. The 94 has seen one more change, the Lawyer's safety, the crossbolt seen in very recent models that is about as useful in the field as a screen door on a submarine.

Advice, get a 94 30-30 of recent manufacture or a pre 64, in good condition. Pass on the crossbolt safety model.
 
Where did the idea ever get started that a pistol caliber like the .44 Magnum or .45 Colt has "more power" than a .30-30? I have even seen folks argue that a .454 revolver is more powerful than a .30-'06 rifle because the "bullet is bigger around" and the .30-'06 is "too old."

How does such nonsense get started and, worse, continue?

Jim
 
I know how you feel Jim. Even with handloads, I don't see how they can compare the power of a handgun cartridge to the .30-.30.
 
FWIW I picked up a Marlin three weeks ago, after posting here to see how it compared to the Winchester.
A majority of the replies seemed to favor the Winchester, slightly.
To me, the Marlin 'felt' better at the time of purchase; and has proven to be very accurate at the range, even w/out a scope.
It is a joy to shoot.
smile.gif

To each his own...


------------------
...defend the 2nd., it protects us all.
No fate but what we make...
 
Winchester Trapper in 30/30 all the way. Traded my Marlin several weeks ago and never looked back. Have 2 Winchesters now.
 
mute and Jim Keenan,
It's really quite simple. If you use the Taylor method to figure the (I hate to use this term)knockdown power, the .44 mag is about equal to the '06 and far exceeds the .30-30. Of course, the Taylor method doesn't take into account the performance of the bullet, just how hard it hits basically. Anything the .30-30 can do, the .44 mag can do better just not as far away. The .454 greatly exceeds the power of the '06 and it has nothing to do with the '06 being old, it's just fact.

The way the reloading manuals and everyone else uses FPE to designate energy is horse hockey. The Taylor Factor is much more accurate.

------------------

Desertscout
desertscout@hotmail.com

"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference -- they deserve a place of honor with all that is good."
--George Washington
 
How in hell can anyone state with a straight face that the .454 casull is more powerful than a 30-06. I,ve killed wild pigs with a .357 Mag, more than my share of deer with just about everything from a .22 LR to a 45-70 and even one with a .458 Mag. Granted the Casull is a very powerful handgun, but that is it. It is a handgun. I dropped one deer at 427 paces with a .308 Win. All the deer I've killed with the .44 Mag. have been at less than 50 yards.
The .454 is a close range proposition, the 30-06 is not. BUT! The 30-06 works just as well at close range, I guarantee it.
Paul B.
 
Again Paul, it's very simple. No one said anything about range. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to know that the '06 will do better at 400+ yds than any handgun. That's wasn't the issue.
Out to a certain point, the .454 has a quite a bit more striking force than the '06 in ANY weight bullet. Let's use the Taylor method of figuring this real quick.
Taylor.. weight x vel. x diameter /7000=TKF
The number that you come up with is not pounds or anything else, it's just a relative number for comparison.

The .454 with a 300 gr bulet @ 1500 fps figures to be 29.05

The .06 with a 165 gr. @ 2900 fps is 21.05

For comparison, the .357 w/158 gr @ 1350 is 10.87
Here's another interesting comparison:
.223 w/55 gr @ 3000 is 5.28

Using the formula for energy that most use is ridiculous and proves nothing. Here's a couple of good examples.
If you look in your reloading manual or one of the hyped up little ads that the ammo makers put out, you'll find that the .223 delivers a little over 1000 lbs of "muzzle energy". The .44 mag also delivers a little over 1000 lbs. Sooo... does this make the .223 as effective for elk as a .44? Hardly.
Using that same silly formula,a 180 bullet from your '06 at 2700 fps generates 2913 ft lbs of "energy". Well now, a BB traveling at 16,250 fps generates 2932 ft lbs. The BB is slightly more powerful than the .06 yes? NO.

Without including the diameter in your formula, you can't get a true comparison of the force of 2 bullets of different diameter.

Remember, bullet performance has nothing to do with this only striking force of the projectile. Simply put, the .454 hits harder than the .06.

------------------

Desertscout
desertscout@hotmail.com

"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference -- they deserve a place of honor with all that is good."
--George Washington
 
Desertscout. I didn't mean for my post to be a flame or putdown. I've been hunting deer and elk for better than 40 years. I lost confidence in all those formulas, whether it was the foot/pounds theory based on velocity, or Elmer Keith's pounds/feet theory, or Taylor's knockout theory based on personal experience. It's a pretty well known fact that Taylor was a bit prejudiced towards any big bore designed by the British, and down on cartridges made elsewhere, or at least damning them with faint praise. I've read his AFRICAN RIFLES AND CARTRIDGES many times over, so I am familiar with his theory.
By his reckoning, W.D.M. Bell was a fool for using the 7x57 to kill almost 1100 elephants for their ivory. Bell was an extraordinary shot, able to hit flying geese with a rifle out past 200 yards, witnessed many times.
Like I said, I don't take much stock in all those theories, or formulas, if you prefer.
The important point is to put the bullet in the right place. The world record grizzly bear was tied by a man with a 30-30. It was not placed in the book, because he shot it in the head damaging the skull, which by the way, only had a .30 caliber hole in it. I have seen pictures of the skull.
I've killed deer at 25 and 75 yards with a .44 magnum. Both never went very far. Maybe 15 feet or so. I've shot others at distances between those mentioned.
As I grow older, I'm trying out somewhat larger cartridges. Larger in caliber, not so much magnums. I've taken a great liking to the .35 Whelan and .358 Win. It is too bad the shooting public hasn't been more responsive to those two rounds. The .358 has been discontinued, and Remington has dropped the rifles in that caliber. The ammo can't be far behind. Pity.
BTW. The .35's don't tear up as much eating meat.
Just one other point to ponder. In the last 40 plus years, I have had the opportunity to own rifles in many different calibers, and shoot other rifles in many more. Even though John Taylor lived in Africa and India, and did a lot more hunting than you and I combined will ever do, I don't believe he used all the rifles and cartridges he claimed to have done. At least, not in hunting situations. Just my thoughts on the matter.
Paul B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top