The 30-30 for moose

[Brutus]

With frequent practice a fella can do.pretty good things with a well sighted 30-30.
Myself, I used my father's 1956 made M94 carbine to take a big buck at 260 yards. Now I changed that rearsight for a Williams FP and a Firesite bead out front. This retro bead is a full third smaller in size from the factory bead.
Flame away. I did this 22 November 2005. Approximately 9:30 in the AM. A 150 grain Winchester Silvertip. High sight in, no real wind & I knew if I aimed at its white throat patch as it looked at me the bullet would land in the boiler room.
No tracking required. Bullet entry, two inches left center of chest. I believe the 30-30 is a moose killer at about half this distance, in good shooting conditions. But that's just me.

 

[Mike Webb]

I agree with previous poster that the old 26 inch 1894 Winchester and 1893 Marlins hang really nice offhand and you can shrink your groups noticeably with an aperture sight as well.

 

[wannabe]

30-30 will kill moose under ideal conditions......30-30 has killed lots of moose and probably wounded even more....it's a deer cartridge....old timers used it because that was all they had and moose were much more plentiful and easy to get close to unlike today.....75 yards max as far as I am concerned....do yourself AND do the moose a favour and get something like a 30-06....they are freaking cheap at intersurplus....myself, I consider a 6.5x55,270,308 to be minimum for moose, 300 mag better and 338 class ideal....

 

[Joel]

With frequent practice a fella can do.pretty good things with a well sighted 30-30.
Myself, I used my father's 1956 made M94 carbine to take a big buck at 260 yards. Now I changed that rearsight for a Williams FP and a Firesite bead out front. This retro bead is a full third smaller in size from the factory bead.
Flame away. I did this 22 November 2005. Approximately 9:30 in the AM. A 150 grain Winchester Silvertip. High sight in, no real wind & I knew if I aimed at its white throat patch as it looked at me the bullet would land in the boiler room.
No tracking required. Bullet entry, two inches left center of chest. I believe the 30-30 is a moose killer at about half this distance, in good shooting conditions. But that's just me.

No flaming here, you put the work in and knew well what you can and can't do with that rifle and load.

 

[rifleman338]

There was an old fella at our hunt camp who used to use a 94 in 32Special and the moose that got in front of him ended up on the game pole. There are much better choices, but thats what he had so thats what he used. Wouldn't be my first choice, but thats me.

 

[Rod]

If I needed meat for the family and a 30-30 is all I had, no problem, with a well placed shot at 100 yards or less. A much better choice is: 30-06, 308 or even a 303 will serve you better at increased distances.

 

[Ardent]

And a .300 trounces all of those, too. Key is striking a balance between recoil that’s acceptable to you, and ballistics in a rifle you don’t mind carrying all day. If I was still serious about killing things, I’d likely be a .300 guy. I’m just a hobbyist now, and like the .257s, .30-30s and .308s… and the .375 for the little real work I still do.

 

[iron cat]

I killed more than a few moose with a single shot 30/30 when I was younger and would have absolutely no issues taking another into the field these days.
Cat

 

[mbogo3]

It isn't the gun it's the man shooting it.

 

[Ribstaylor]

It's not the optimal choice in 2023. But within a certain distance and with the right bullets it will do the job. We have better then it now so unless it's all you have, or can afford I'd say use something better.

 

[Northern Shooter]

Under 100m? Sure.

Over 100m? There are countless better options.

If you want to stick with a lever action in a traditional cartridge, the 45-70 offers far better knock down power for big game like moose.

 

[Ardent]

Under 100m? Sure.

Over 100m? There are countless better options.

If you want to stick with a lever action in a traditional cartridge, the 45-70 offers far better knock down power for big game like moose.

Not my experience on that last line from guiding some of that ilk. Lethal, yes… knock down power, no.

 

[SuperCub]

Not my experience on that last line from guiding some of that ilk. Lethal, yes… knock down power, no.

I don't think there is anything that has more or less "knock down" on a moose unless you make a direct CNS hit.

 

[Mike Webb]

I don't think there is anything that has more or less "knock down" on a moose unless you make a direct CNS hit.

Yup. Maybe a LAWS rocket launcher. An oldtimrr told me once, " Big ears is just like a Timex, shockproof.
I've only killed two bulls, one with 35 Whelen, one with 300 magnum. Neither failed to impress the moose much. They just trudged along until they began to stagger and fell over.

 

[antiqueguy]

A .30-30 with even a cup and core bullet should do the job out to about 150yards if the shot is placed right. Do your part know the limits of your gun and ammo and you should do just fine.

 

[QueensHorseman]

I have taken moose with a .32 Special which is pretty similar (read vastly better) to a ,30-30 and with 170 grain bullets it worked very well, I lived where I hunted at that time and didn’t attempt long shots. Get close enough that you can hit the correct spot and shoot until they stay down. I could say the same if using a much larger cartridge.

Would I choose a .32 (.30-30) if I was travelling a long distance or in a wide open area? Probably not. But will it work effectively within a reasonable range, of course it will. There is over a 100 years of evidence that suggest it can work quite well but if planning a costly moose hunt today I would choose a .30-06, 9.3x62 or a .300 H&H.

 

[Ardent]

That was well put.

 

[dan belisle]

I have taken moose with a .32 Special which is pretty similar (read vastly better) to a ,30-30 and with 170 grain bullets it worked very well, I lived where I hunted at that time and didn’t attempt long shots. Get close enough that you can hit the correct spot and shoot until they stay down. I could say the same if using a much larger cartridge.

Would I choose a .32 (.30-30) if I was travelling a long distance or in a wide open area? Probably not. But will it work effectively within a reasonable range, of course it will. There is over a 100 years of evidence that suggest it can work quite well but if planning a costly moose hunt today I would choose a .30-06, 9.3x62 or a .300 H&H.

All correct, even the "32 is better" part. - dan

 

[iron cat]

Under 100m? Sure.

Over 100m? There are countless better options.

If you want to stick with a lever action in a traditional cartridge, the 45-70 offers far better knock down power for big game like moose.

There are lots of "better" options , yes, but that is not the point.
Lots of people hunt with .50 and .54 traditional flint and caplock muzzle loaders as well as traditional bows.
It's nice to have choices.....
Cat

 

[Ardent]

I don't think there is anything that has more or less "knock down" on a moose unless you make a direct CNS hit.

Have to disagree in gentlemanly debate, seen many a moose go rigid and tip over, loosely collapse like the legs went to jello, or go stiff legged and stagger a handful of diagonal steps before tilting over from basic, modern chamberings to the regular old vitals shot. .308, 7x57, .300, .375 etc. It’s been too many to believe it’s luck.

They’re likely the easiest animal to kill in their weight class from my experience, and rarely death run mortally wounded with a good chambering and bullet, on a good vitals shot. Not like a mountain goat that fights and scrambles for footholds and elevation til it’s last second, or a bear’s death stroll.

Has been my experience the slow heavy rounds raise the prospect of longer recoveries, they were always dead at the end of the blood trail. They usually took a longer walk first. Again, talking really slow rounds, anything modern achieves plenty of performance to manage good terminal ballistics.