Win. 94 Trapper 30/30 - Opinions?

G

Grapeshot

New member
Would like to hear from some OWNERS on this one ... having had (and loved) the Trapper in .45 Colt, I was wondering about the 30/30 version. Specifically,
1. How accurate at 100 yds? 250?
2. What's the velocity for a 150 grn?
3. Best compact scope? Would a shotgun scope work?
4. The Ranger/Compact 16" is $50 cheaper - should I just get that?
5. Max. range? Trajectory?
6. Muzzle blast bad?
7. How does 30/30 compare with .223 on deer and on people?

I want the gun to carry when I don't feel like carrying a real rifle. It will be for all-around farm defense from critters and people. I was going to buy a .223 Bushy AR Carbine, but frankly I think a 30/30 carbine would take care of the same needs at 1/3 the cost and no hair-pulling trying to locate USGI mags.

I think it is better than a heavy old SKS/AK (been there, done that). Sorry so many questions!
 
Grapeshot: Why bother with a scope on a handy little package like the trapper? Get a receiver sight if you feel the need for greater precision. For the effective range of the carbine, it'll make the piece more cumbersome, but that's just my 2 cents. I'd use the Marlin if I wanted a scope.
 
You're right, it does make it too clumsy with a scope - but my vision is terrible and I need the magnification to see my target better. I was hoping to get a real, real compact scope and it could still be somewhat handy.
 
I saw one at the pawn shop a few weeks ago that had a forward mounted pistol scope on it (about a 4x I think, maybe a 2x) and man that thing was handy. Very easy to see through the scope and had a good balance too. I wish I would have taken a better look at how the scope was mounted. I'd love to know how to do that to my .44 Trapper.
 
Grapeshot--
My experience with the .45 Colt M-94 Trapper is limited to a few rounds from a friend's example. I own a 1950s vintage 94 .30-30 cut to 16 inches, with a Lyman receiver sight and plain front post. I have shot it extensively. I'll throw in what answers I can provide.

1. How accurate at 100 yds? 250?
Easily minute-of-whitetail at 100. Someone with better eyes than mine (My elder son, for one) could make a clean kill on a deer at 200. I can hit a humanoid silhouette at 200 every time, with a rest, but it would not be sporting for me to shoot a deer at that range. Remember, I'm using peep sights, not a scope.

2. What's the velocity for a 150 grn?
Best I recall, about 2050. I'm not at home and don't have chrono records with me. There is a definite velocity cost to be paid for the handiness of the short tube.

3. Best compact scope?
I've never shot a .30-30 with a scope. I've used a couple of the Leupold M-8 compact scopes at 2.5 and 3 X and they are GREAT. They are not cheap, and, as Jerry pointed out, it makes a compact little arm a bit clumsy. I wouldn't scope mine on a bet. I like it just the way it is--Short, light, handy as a walking stick, in and out of the case quickly, and it doesn't need pampering.

Would a shotgun scope work?
Probably, but all you get there is single sighting plane, with little or no magnification. Not enough return for the added clumsiness and delicateness (Delicacy? That sounds like a culinary term to me.)

4. The Ranger/Compact 16" is $50 cheaper - should I just get that?
For your stated purpose, I'd say yes. If the arm is to be a general purpose hunting proposition, no. Go with the 20" tube for added velocity and sight radius. Also, if you do scope it, the appearance with the longer barrel is not so awkward. To me. Granted, your eye and mine may differ somewhat.

5. Max. range? Trajectory?
See 1., above. Half the fun with a new gun is experimentation at various ranges. Most large loading manuals have ballistic tables in 'em for various bullet shape/ weight coefficients and velocities to allow you to figure your maximum point blank range. At a guess, with iron sights--sight in with the 150 RNSP three inches high at 100 yards. This should give APPROXIMATELY zero at 150 and two inches low at 200. Look in the Federal ammo brochure your dealer will happily give you. Details therein.

6. Muzzle blast bad?
Not so much as a .308, but noticeably greater than a 20" bbl .30-30. You need ear muffs at the range with whatever barrel length and load. But you won't be shocked senseless if you DON'T use muffs to make a shot or two at a deer or hog.

7. How does 30/30 compare with .223 on deer
This one has been beaten to death. The .223 is not really sporting or humane on deer UNLESS you use a scope,
AND proper, heavier bullets (not 55 gr. varmint poppers)
AND a good rest
AND keep shots at under 100 yards
AND hold for neck or high lung shots only,
AND do a lot of SERIOUS field position practice, not just plinking or blazing away to make noise or bounce beer cans around.
Remember, the .223 is a varmint cartridge, adapted as an antipersonnel round by the military, and, as such, sporting and clean kills don't enter into the equation. The .30-30 is somewhat more forgiving of sloppy shooting. The bullet has enough mass to smash through a shoulder and bull through the offside of a deer.

and on people?
It is easier to hit a human being at an unknown range with the .223. Unless you are doing hostage rescue stuff, it doesn't matter if you make an instant one-shot stop. The individual struck in the torso will become muy enfermo, muy pronto, and will stop what he's doing.

Much the same holds true with the .30-30, except for ease of first round strikes at longer ranges. But, please think--Under what circumstances would you possibly engage in a rifle duel with someone beyond, say, 50 yards? You pretty well have to stipulate some proximity to determine if you even WANT to harm another person. You can make a case for it in the military and possibly in law enforcement, but VERY seldom in the private sector. Yes, I can come up with such a scenario. Other than outright murder, I know of one--Exactly ONE--such situation reported to me at reliable second hand, in the 40+ years I've paid close attention to such things. Perhaps another three or four, per anecdotes, but I couldn't verify these if I had to. I know of several long range pistol shootouts, with predictable results.

Sorry this is so long winded, but you DID ask for opinions. My opinions are mine own, and they serve me well. I feel I have earned the right to them over the years.

Best,
Johnny

------------------
---The Second Amendment ensures the rest of the Bill of Rights---
 
Hmmm,interesting about velocity figure. Hornady lists a 158 gr jhp in .357 mag at 1750 fps out of an 18 in. tube. I would be more than tempted to go Trapper in .38/.357 mag. More rounds, less recoil and pretty darn close at the terminal end with a larger diameter slug.

I have 3 Trappers in .22lr, .44 Mag and .45LC. I agree, they are handy and fast. Really, my only question would be why not another .45LC or .44Mag? I also have a Winchester in 30-30 w/24 in tube, and while I like it a bunch, it has significantly more recoil than the shorter and lighter .44Mag. FWIW, I am extremely recoil sensitive in a shoulder fired arm, and believe me, I CAN tell a huge difference. 4 or 5 shots from the 30-30 and it's all I can stand. The .45 or .44 OTOH, I can shoot a couple hundered rounds at a time. The bigger slugs seem to have more of a "push" than a sharp "rap". Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy my 30-30, especially since I paid so little for it years ago, and it's trigger is worlds beyond the newer offerings.
Dam*, I'm talking myself into an early Christmas present here ;)
 
RAE,
I can see why you might consider the .357 Trapper, based on your observations, especially if the carbine were for home defense, general door gun, and for hunting under 75 yds. But the improved sectional density of the 150 g. .30 bullet over the 158 g .357 bullet means that the .30-30 will retain FAR more energy down-range. Penetration will also be a factor; the .30-30 is going to go through a shoulder much better at a given velocity than the .357.

That extra 300 fps is nothing to scoff at, either. Recall that energy is mass times velocity squared, and in rifle calibers, energy is important.

********

Johnny's pretty much answered the way I would. I can appreciate that your eyes may not be what they used to, but I think that I'd try a good receiver peep (available for about $35, no gunsmithing required on newer rifles) before I marred the handiness of that easy-using little carbine.

Remember that this is NOT a "mountain rifle." For a M-94, 2.5" groups at 100 yards is good accuracy. The beauty of the Trapper is that it allows you to have a rifle on you, so you can close some of the distance yourself.

Rule of thumb: Because of the drop of the bullet and the reduced energy, try to avoid shots over 150. Yes, I too know people who've killed whitetail deer at over 200 with one, but MY rule of thumb is 150. :)
 
Hmmm, the sectional density. Forgot about that. After rechecking some of the data, I believe the 2050 figure is more for a 170 gr, and not a 150 gr. Accurate lists some 150 gr out of a 20 in tube over 2300fps. That would be a quantum leap in energy vs the .357. I though it sounded too good to be true ;) Still, the .357 has a lot of advantages, even at reduced levels. There is little argument that supports the .357 as being an sub-par round in a revlover, and a Trapper is more of a good thing. I wouldn't feel undergunned, but I would feel more comfortable with something more.
Personally, I would go with a .44mag Trapper, FWIW. I don't think the .357Mag or even the 30-30, has the needed punch that a bigger bore can deliver for all of the above situations. Throw into that fracas the possiblity of black bear (by grapeshots profile he lives in WV), and my choice would be as big a bore as I could carry and shoot straight. Still in all, I think every cartridge mentioned has merit, IMHO. Good topic though as it evoked a lot of thought. (That plus I was looking for someone to talk me out of a 30-30 or a .357 mag Trapper ) ;)

Hey, I'm a Lever Addict, what can I say ;)
 
Thanks, guys!

In doing a deja news search, I discovered that NO ONE in the history of the net has ever actually chrono'd their Trapper 30/30. I have been guestimating that I could hot-load a 150 gr. to 2100 fps out of it.

Yep, RAE, I'm a Mountaineer, complete with black bears roaming across my back 40. I think I'd love the 44 Mag. Trapper, but the ballistics tables from my Sierra Manual lead me to believe that the 30 WCF has more range. The .44 (240 gr. at 1700 fps) has a max. range of 145 yards (with a zero at 120 yds) with 894 f.p.e. The 30/30 has a max. range of 180 yds. (150 grn FN at 2100 fps) if you zero at 150. At 150, it has 897 f.p.e. They are fairly equivelent, but you could get away with 200 yds. with the .30. While this may not seem like much, I need all the range I can get out of this thing since hilltop to hilltop shots are common here. I have a .308 Browning Lever Rifle which would be much better, but I just don't like trucking it around in my John Deere Gator every time I go on the hill.

Are there other short, LIGHT carbines out there other than the M94?
I thought about the Rem. Model 7, but frankly, I'm stuck in the M94's price range right now.
 
Grapeshot---

Gee Whiz! Am I making history here, by posting a few lines on TFL? Went and pulled part of my old chronograph records. I understand this is data for ONE M-94 with 16" bbl and ONE M-94 with 20" bbl., so YMMV.

Instrumentation: Oehler 43 chronograph, with third check screen, distance 10 ft to start screen, spacing 3 feet. All this testing was done in early 1995. Temps ran from mid 50s to low 70s F. this is not extensive research. Our main concern was to duplicate some popular factory loads. We discovered early on that we really wanted to use the 150 gr, to flatten out trajectory in the open prairies of north Texas and high desert to the west. I have been unable to locate any more records, but, for what it's worth, here's what I have.

Factory PMC 150 SP 16" 2138 20" 2238

Factory PMC 170 SP 16" 1914 20" 2,000

Handloads
Win Silvertip 150 16" 2090 20" 2222 32.0 gr IMR 3031

Rem CoreLokt 150 16" 2022 20" 2196 32.0 gr IMR 3031

Sorry I don't have more actual chrono data, but maybe you can see the trend.

All the best,
Johnny




------------------
---The Second Amendment ensures the rest of the Bill of Rights---
 
BTW, 3031 was exactly what I was gonna use.
As far as velocity loss is concerned, Sierra now makes a 125 gr. HP flat nose which may be able to be driven to 2300 fps or more (2500 in a 20"). Sounds like I've reinvented the 7.62 AK round. Hey, I bet the Hornady Light Magnum 30/30 would give extra velocity in a Trapper, right?
Sorry to keep this going guys, I'm just hooked on the idea of bringing the 30/30 carbine up off its knees. It's a variant of that old gun nut's game, "I don't want to carry any more gun than I absolutely need".

Thanks!
 
"I don't want to carry any more gun than I absolutely need".

Sounds like a plan, man.

As to 3031 powder, that's what I started out with in .30-30 because that's what one hunting/reloading buddy was using. It looked okay, gave acceptable accuracy (iron sights, y'know) and velocities. My goal was to load inexpensive practice ammo that duplicated the factory load in my rifle. I was satisfied. You might research some other powders with better characteristics. W-748, for example, looks pretty good. I gave 3031 load data because that's all I had, from personal knowledge.

I carried my trapper .30-30 as my sole long gun for several years. In the olden days, like most other cops I thought the riot shotgun was THE police shoulder gun, unless you could be a SNY-PURR on the Tac Team. I did a lot of work with the LE shotgun years ago, and incidentally was the first cop I knew to carry a short, autoloading shotgun for business. (There's another saga there . . . .)

For a time I carried both a rifle and shotgun, in various combinations. 'Way down the line, I finally decided that my days on point on raids, etc, were over. About the only time I would need anything other than a sidearm would be on manhunts and to back another uniformed officer with problems. I began leaving the shotgun home, and seldom missed it. The rifle or carbine was just right to lay back and watch for something to go wrong. Or to apply some precision to a standoff while awaiting the Tactical guys. To watch the back door of some rural hideout while the black suits did the front door. Or any number of other scenarios. Like in the poem by LTC Cooper's daughter Libby,
There aren't many problems a man can't fix,
With seven hundred dollars and a thirty-ought-six.

If you can be far enough from a source of difficulty, and still able to apply judicious force, you can often avoid injury. Anyway, the short .30-30 was long my choice for light, handy, rugged, etc.

I went through two phases with the AR-15, short and long. I'm currently enamored with the Savage Scout .308, and it always rides in the trunk of the car. The optical system is VERY fast. It is as precise as needed for other than hostage rescue, and I imagine it would do fine for 90% of THAT unpleasant chore. Ballistics of the .308 are superior to the .30-30, and not all that far behind the .223, at practical ranges.

And, speaking of which---
The Savage comes with a superior set of sights--strongly mounted receiver peep and medium front gold bead. These are FAST. I did a lot of the barrel break-in with those sights while waiting for my Leupold Scout Scope. The iron sighted rig is light, fast and powerful. It is not much more money than a .30-30 set up the way I like one. If you search the net, I bet you can find the Savage for not much over $400, with the iron sights installed. I added a third sling stud, to use the Ching sling. If you want to up grade to the Scout scope, the mount is already in place. It needs only an IER scope and mounts, and you're in business. Again, all kindsa ways to skin a cat.

Best,
Johnny

------------------
---The Second Amendment ensures the rest of the Bill of Rights---

[This message has been edited by Johnny Guest (edited September 03, 2000).]
 
Johnny,

I VERY much appreciate your input on this, thank you. I will check out the Savage, though I have vision problems and I'll have to put glass on it regardless. Don't get me wrong - as a visually impaired person, I am the LAST person I would want around when a gunfight erupts. But unfortunately, fate has in the past been no respector of my preference, and even I have been forced to pick up a gun to ward off the badguys (no shooting thank goodness). Hence, I must do the best I can with what I have, and that means using a scope (or at least a red dot).
I meant to respond to your question in an earlier post, about why someone would need a defensive rifle beyond 50 yards. About a year and half ago, just down the road from me, a man was shot by his neighbor (who was also sleeping with his wife) with a high-powered deer rifle at maybe 75 - 100 yards. I do not know if the victim returned fire with a rifle, but before it was over, the fight got closer and there were shotgun blasts and whizzing pistol bullets exchanged, until the original victim lay dead, full of holes.
If a rifle fight were to take place, it would take place here in WV, where everybody hunts and owns a deer rifle.
Ironically, my fiance has the same last name as the perpetrator, though she says she is no relation (lol).
 
Grapeshot wrote
Ironically, my fiance has the same last name as the perpetrator, though she says she is no relation (lol).

I ain't touching that one!

Your point about deer rifles being close at hand in WV is surely well taken. The situation would be similar in rural Texas. And, some would be surprised at the number of long guns stashed in vehicles in the cities, as well.

My question about the LONG RANGE rifle scenario was largely rhetorical. If I can come up with one, I know it must have happened, and repeatedly, in the past. As I said, I only have personal knowledge of the one instance.

Actually, I know of several close range gunfights in which rifles figured prominently, but mainly as weapon of convenience. And good sense, when you come right down to it. No matter the range, a rifle in hand is USUALLY superior to a handgun or a shotgun. If at very close range, there are a lot of shots missed with a shotgun, due to the misconception of "spread" and "pattern."

Which perhaps runs over into another topic area.

Best,
Johnny

------------------
---The Second Amendment ensures the rest of the Bill of Rights---
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top