What's Your Choice
- Thread starter ronecol
- Start date
Given that they both are roughly the same size and weight, the 30-30, boring as it is, is much more versatile. Now, if your second choice was a plain, short, light ‘92 in 45LC or 44mag, that would be a different story (I’d have to go for one of each in that case).
Some people seem to love them, that's fine. My prejudice says they're a gimmick. I have no use for the feature - Literally the only time I've taken down any of the takedown models I've owned over the years was to make a smaller package for shipping it off to the new owner. Some people like the idea of being able to break them down to stash in a pack, but I'd wager that this is not actually used nearly as often as people talk about it.
And there are clear downsides: They add weight, and a weak point. And interrupted thread designs don't like being repeatedly being disassembled and assembled.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
I'd go with the 30-30 sporter as it be easily scoped. Can't use the irons on these with me old peepers.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I know it’s not a legal option in this thread, but I’d take a ‘94 takedown .30-30 20”. .30-30 is just a bit more useful cartridge in BC, and penetrates as well or better than the .44. Nothing not to like about a takedown lever.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Ye be wrong about the penetration power of the .44 mag compared to the 30-30. The .44 mag over the yrs has taken the largest and baddest critters world wide
by handgun hunters using hardcast boolits in weights of 320-390+gr launched from at speeds in the 14-1600 fps range at close distance, say 20-80 yds.
The 30-30 ,though a great round within its limits is hampered by the light bullets typically loaded in 'er. I sure wouldn't bonk bear, elk or moose with it on
shoulder shots. On these critters, the 44 mag has shown pass through on both shoulders with cast on many a hunt.
If Winchester would only bring back the model 94 Legacy units in 44 mag & 45 Colt, I'd be happy with either of 'em.
I see one offered on another site.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Actually loaded with the same bullets (hard cast), .30-30 penetrates at least as well .44 due to its sectional density. The regular 170gr .30 call bullet has an SD of .256, which .44 doesn’t equal until 350grs. A typical 193gr .30 cal cast has a SD equal to a 380gr .44. The smaller frontal area of the .30 also helps. Of course very few load heavy cast .30-30, as you get a better effect on game from a good soft point. But, the .30-30’s got penetration covered if that’s your desire.
Overall due to its trajectory and better speed with typical loads, I find it a more effective cartridge than the heavy slow chamberings which it was designed to supplant oddly enough.
That isn’t to say a .357 / .44 / .45 lever carbine isn’t without its charm, just that as a pure hunting rifle I find the .30-30 more useful.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Took a skim, that’s a high fence classic American good ole hunting adventure. They love to use all sorts of stuff that isn’t the best tool for the job, but is interesting, ran into it myself outfitting bears. My least favourite round I guided was a .450 Marlin.
No question cast bullets kill things, so do arrows effectively. If you want things to die where they stand and be able to reach out easily, neither is my preference said from former a guide’s and travelling hunter’s perspective. That said a .30-30 isn’t my go to, either.
But in the levergun world we’re discussing here, and I do love them, there’s limited options for better trajectories and modern bullet performance. .30-30’s moving in the right direction and gives a hunter more options than a .44 however.
If it’s more about the shooting sports than the field sports, totally can see going for the .44.
No question cast bullets kill things, so do arrows effectively. If you want things to die where they stand and be able to reach out easily, neither is my preference said from former a guide’s and travelling hunter’s perspective. That said a .30-30 isn’t my go to, either.
But in the levergun world we’re discussing here, and I do love them, there’s limited options for better trajectories and modern bullet performance. .30-30’s moving in the right direction and gives a hunter more options than a .44 however.
If it’s more about the shooting sports than the field sports, totally can see going for the .44.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
Yep. As a guide working in the areas & conditions you operated in ye no doubt have seen many a client that be limited in experience with the tools they used and their abilities.
Fer me, I've mostly gone the solo route as it's always been a spiritual thing to just be out there and enjoy the woods without others around to complicate things.
No pressure to take meat critters fer me. Never filled me home up with stuffed critters & skulls neither nor have taken many pics of 'em.
Everyone has their ways & experiences.
OP. Ye should be happy with either rifle ye choose if she fits & shoots straight.
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I can hear ya there 100%, I’ve moved that way myself in my own way. And I agree with Conor and the general thread sentiment the 92 is a lovely little action, I’m always on the lookout for a high condition .218 or .25-20.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
The 1892 action be too short for the 30-30 as it was made for revolver length cartridges in use during that era. Many folks wanted rifles that would feed the same ammo as their sidearms so Winchester complied and came out with units like the 1873 & 1892"s.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
I'd like a '92 in 32-20 meself. Fun pest bonker & plinker fer sure.
