"The 30-30 has killed more game in North America than any other cartridge"

http://www.norma.cc/content.asp?Typ=59&Lang=2&DocumentID=279&Submeny=4&Rubrik=Calibers&Title=30-30%20Winchester30-30 Winchester

It is certainly marginal, at best, for use on elk. Only the most skilled marksman, who is willing to only take shots at close range and who will choose and use only the best available bullet should consider it for such hunting. In Europe, it is considered adequate only for use on the diminutive roe deer.

Any time you must qualify a cartridge for use on game with the proviso that it should only be used for broadside shots, or only head shots, or only if you can shoot em in the eye, that cartridge is inappropriate for the job. It's time we develop the attitude that recognize game loads are those which have a reasonable expectation of killing the game animal with one shot from any angle within the range limitation of that cartridge. Such an attitude would ensure there would be no elk shooting with .30/30's no buffalo shooting with .243's, and no grizzly shooting with .22 rimfires.
 
It may be true that the 30 30 has killed more but it also has wounded more game too. Not so much the cal. but people will buy a 30 30 because of price etc.

I know that my cousons (5 of them) all had 30 30 's and only shot them a couple of times a year.

I know not all people are that way but enough.

Larry
 
The 30-30's killed lots of game, so have many other cartridges. Big deal....

Who cares if it is #1 or not? It doesn't afffect the 30-30's virtues or limitations.
 
I was a kid, growing up in the boondocks of bushland Saskatchewan, in the 1930s. Virtually everyone lived on wild meat, all year. The country I knew was over-run with elk, plenty of moose and a fair smattering of deer. An older brother was the hunter in our family and during about a ten year period he killed about 35 elk and six moose, plus some deer (jumpers.)
The bush homesteaders used many different calibres, but the 30-30 was far and away the most popular. The little stores of the day stocked rifle shells, and of course, they always had 30-30. I understand it was this way over the entire area of northern Canada. Thousands and thousands of people living on wild meat and the most common rifle was the 30-30.
A story I was well aware of, having heard it first hand, as well as by others, was a man who shot moose and sold the meat. I remember the figures, in 1928 he shot 28 moose. His rifle? You guessed it, the old faithful Winchester 30-30.
In the 1950s I knew a man who supplied his family with moose meat during the 1930s in BC. He told me that during the depression he shot about 32 moose, and his rifle was the 30-30. I then asked him how many he had wounded. He thought for a fair bit, then answered, "I don't remember any that got away wounded." Until about the end of the 1950s, the major hardware store in Prince George, the heart of the hunting area in central BC, sold more 30-30 ammunition than any other calibre.
Remember, those early hunters were HUNTERS. In the 1930s they wore Indian buckskin moccasins, and they sneaked through the bush. Because ammunition cost money, they never wasted it by shooting at anything, except from a position that would virtually assure them of a kill. A man I knew very well used a Winchester 351 self loading. If the question were asked on these threads if the 351 was suitable for deer, I think the answer would be, no. But, this fellow in Saskatchewan that hunted with one, killed nine moose with one box of twenty cartridges!
I know, it is hard for modern people to have any idea what conditions were in the 1930s. A box of 30-30 ammo probably cost about $2.00, but if a man was fortunate enough to get a job, he was very lucky if he earned a dollar a day. It was common to have only two or three rounds of ammunition in the house, and no money to buy any more. But the man would go hunting for meat for a very needy family, maybe with two 30-30 shells. Do you think he took chances on missing, or wounding an animal.
Yes, for a good long time there was more big game shot with the 30-30 than any other calibre. Of this I have no doubt.
 
It may be true that the 30 30 has killed more but it also has wounded more game too. Not so much the cal. but people will buy a 30 30 because of price etc.

I know that my cousons (5 of them) all had 30 30 's and only shot them a couple of times a year.

I know not all people are that way but enough.

Larry

Shooters wound game, not rifles......

Any gun can make a clean kill if it is in the right hands.
 
I dont own a 30-30 nor do I want to but it certainly has taken its share of animals.Lets not forget that years ago a license meant nothing to anyone, if you saw an animal you shot it for food this would result in many animals being taken over the course of a year.Around here everbody had one hanging on the wall and they were well used.
 
Bah - caliber discussions are for people with too much time on their hands. Grab yer gun and go huntin. If you shoot something that don't subsequently die in short order, you didn't shoot it in the right spot. You run even an itty bitty bullet the size/weight of a toothpick through the right spot on the critter, and you'll eat pretty good come suppertime. :)
 
But since I have too much time on my hands, let's talk!

It beats me why the 30-30 Ackley didn't catch on as a factory offering; it would make those old 30-30's easily comparable to a 303 British, and within a wisker of a as much 'oomph' as a 308.
 
While we have other more powerful cartridges, my father and grandfather perfer 30-30 for moose than anything else we have, including the popular .303brit and 7.62x54R.

Dad got his moose last fall with a Win model 64, about 80 meters, ironsight and in the vitals.

While I don't think there is any data to prove the 30-30 is superior in North America, there is no doubt it is one of the top three calibers involved in taking big game, of all time.
 
Don't sell the 30/30 short or the .44 wcf for that matter, don't forget that in thier heydays everyone hunted for food, they had to. I 'll agree with the statement. One thing that escapes most is the accuracy that the round is capable of......I have quite a few fancy .30 cal. benchguns for testing cast bullets, a .300 Whisper, a .308 Win, and a 30/30, all are very capable but the 30/30 holds an edge on them, the perfect combination of powder capacity and neck length, I just wish I could get some of those .30 American cases with the sm. rifle primer pocket. I guess you can tell, I like the 30/30!!!
 
Bull crap the old flintlocks and cap and ball killed more game,not to mention the blunderbluss black powder shot-guns of the day for fowl! and the cal would be 64,54,50,45 none 30 cal!

Bob
 
Last edited:
Bull crap the old flintlocks and cap and ball killed more game,not to mention the blunderbluss black powder shot-guns of the day for fowl! and the cal would be 64,54,50,45 none 30 cal!

Bob

Well I'd SOONER be shootin' a cartridge gun than a front stuffer just like everyone else since they came around which happily occured at the time of western expansion. So the lever gun did reign supreme out west, won't comment on anything east of the Appalachians. In Canada, the .303 Brit must be a front runner because guns and ammo were cheap and plentiful for many decades and they kill, ask Hitler.
 
I'm with savagefan in regards to the .303 in Canada, it edges out the 30/30 in game downed in Canada, but add the USA and Mexico and it's a no-brainer...the 30/30. I read an article years ago that said, in the old days in Mexico, nobody knew there was any other caliber then the 30/30!!
 
I'm with savagefan in regards to the .303 in Canada, it edges out the 30/30 in game downed in Canada, but add the USA and Mexico and it's a no-brainer...the 30/30. I read an article years ago that said, in the old days in Mexico, nobody knew there was any other caliber then the 30/30!!

Still say the 22lr has em all beat.
 
However, you must also consider the amazing number of 30-30 rifles of all makes out there. It's not just the carbines and there are millions of those, It's found in bolt guns, single shots, drillings, over and under combo guns, and handguns. Probably lots more too.
Shear numbers of these rifles ensure that even with limited game numbers, the game that was taken was taken in large part with the 30-30.
Popular in Europe too, as the 7.62x51R, but generally not in lever guns.

And from a market perspective, would the .30-30 have sold so many freaking guns if it wasn't getting the job done? How many cartridges of the day are still so popular?
 
Even though muzzle loading guns and rifes accounted for alot of game, by the numbers they probably didn't shoot as many animals in all their centuries than modern rifles have in the last 100 years. There were alot fewer hunters and certainly to casual plinkers in the 1700's, as opposed to today. No, I think we have surpassed the amount of lead thrown by muzzleloaders a long time ago.
 
Back
Top Bottom