30-30 Barrel Length, or...Is a Trapper "Enough Gun"

[slimster]

Like many others on this forum, I am a big fan of the 30-30. I also happen to prefer the shorter barrel lengths. A Trapper is easy to carry and convenient to have around, but I have had a number of people try to tell me that the 30-30 is really not enough gun for deer, and I was making things worse by "handicaping" myself with a stubby barrel. I just refuse to buy into that rationale! My Trapper wears no glass, just open sights, and that's just the way I like it. Where I hunt, Most of the shots offered are within 100 yards, and quick shots in thick cover are often in the cards. The Trapper EXCELLS for this. But there are also a couple of areas where a 200 yard shot might present itself. I haven't taken the long shot before, but I feel confident that if a nice enough buck gave me that opportunity, the Trapper would be up to the task. I don't own a chronograph, but several years back, I shot the Trapper over a friend's chrono. Factory loads from Win. Fed. and Rem. averaged between 2150-2200 for 150's, and slightly over 2000 fps for the 170's. Thats better than the original ballistics from a 26 inch barrel in 1895! With 150's I can "hold on hair" at 200 yards. Now maybe at 200, that bullet might have a little bit less than that magic 1000 ft. lbs of energy, but I hardly think it's going to just bounce off. I would love to hear everybody's thoughts! Thanks!

[PaperPatch]

Pay no attention to the naysayers. If you can shoot it straight........it'll work fine.

[J Miller]

Slimster,

If you can put the bullet where it needs to be out to 200 yds, that Trapper will get the job done.

I'll bet those that said you were handicapping yourself wanted to recommend a big fat magnum of some kind too.
At any rate, most magnum lovers today have no real hunting experience to base their prejudices on. They just regurgitate what they've read in Guns and Ammo and the other rags.

Deer haven't changed in the last 110 years. The 30-30 of 1895 stomped them then, and with the better ballistics of today it can stomp them now.

Take your Trapper hunting and enjoy it.

Joe

[Noah Zark]

I have a Model 94 Trapper in 30-30 and can chase a 2L soda bottle around the 200 yd berm all day with 170 gr Remington factory loads when the rear sight elevator is set properly. I would not be afraid to take any game with it out to 200 yds.

Noah

[Tennessee Hayre]

Anybody who knows anything about guns knows that any .30 cal including a 30-30 will put a deer down anywhere anytime. Just my two cents.

[meanc]

I've got both a Trapper 30-30 and a 20" Marlin 336. I wouldn't hesitate one bit on a good clean shot at 200yds with either. As a matter of fact, I've seen a deer hit at over 225yds with a 30-30 as if it had been hit with a 30-06. It was a complete pass through both lungs and dropped within 30yds. I've hit deer at 75 yds from my Marlin with a perfect lung shot and had them run further.

Anyway, I'd personally try to get closer, but if I couldn't I'd take the shot.

Here are some of my testing results with the Winchester 150gr PP as I had doubts myself.

Chrono:

Trapper - 2165fps
Marlin - 2230fps

65fps difference


Accuracy @ 100yd

Trapper - 1.25" 3 shot grps
Marlin - .8" 3 shot grps

Accuracy @ 200yds

Trapper - 3" 3 shot grps
Marlin - 2.25" 3 shot grps

Drop from 100yd to 200yd (sighted in 2" high @ 100yds)

Trapper - 6.75" drop
Marlin - 6." drop

.75" difference


Hope this helps you decide. It certainly alleviated any doubts I had.

[Borregos]

If it was legal up here I would deer hunt with my 14" T/C in 30-30 with no worries!! Trapper is just fine!!

[cshold]

My son got a deer this past Sat. with a
95 gr. broad head arrow traveling much
slower than a 30-30 150gr.
Arrow went threw the deer and stuck into a tree.
deer looked like it was hit with a 300 mag.

Don’t get caught up in that not enough horsepower
Web.

[Hobie]

Borregos alluded to a point of interest. The .30-30 has been successfully used from barrels as short as 10" and the case has been shortened to create the .30 Herrett and THAT cartridge has also been used from the 10" barrels and successfully used! You've no worries other than the friends you keep.

[Nath]

Thankyou very much Meanc, I have no chrony but I have owned a trapper then a 20" Marlin and now I'm back to a trapper again and I have allways wondered what the differance in vel was because I have allways struggled to detect any differance and now you have answered it for me

I have shot at deer at 200yds but these slow lumbering 30/30s keep making me over compensate and I shoot over the top of m'.
Thats what happens when you listen to the BS from them that know nowt!

I aint gonna shoot over the next one other wise because I have promised to eat my hat next time! (Errm that reminds me, better put some mustard sachets in my coat).

Them 30/30 bullets don't waste any time trying to destroy them selves, they just steam on through, you see more ain't allways better. (Thats what I tell the Mrs anyway ).

Just shoot the darn thing and tell the others to build a bridge and get over it

[tman]

when winchester first brought out the 30wcf. ,it was touted as a grizzly stopper. original loads probably equal what you would get out of a trapper today. if it killed griz back then, it will work today. definetly enough gun.

[J Miller]

I just remembered something I read a year or so ago. A poster was discussing the Reduced Recoil 30-06 and 308 ammo that's out now. Saying how great it would be because his children or spouse could use a good powerful cartridge to hunt with and still not be beat to death by recoil.

When another poster posted a comparison between the ballistics of the Reduced Recoil ammo and the old 30-30 they were almost identical. But ..... the 30-30 isn't good enough. Bah!!!


Joe

[1886]

I would suggest that the nay sayers are just slightly misinformed. 1886.

[slimster]

Thanks for the numbers meanc. I've always sighted mine to hit 3 inches high at 100 yards, and this keeps me on a paper plate out to 200 long steps with 150's. Seems like most of my neighbors who hunt use a Wally World special 30-06 with at least a 3x9 scope on it. They can't seem to fathom why I want to hunt with such a tiny little "toy", especially if they know that I have other rifles. Some feel that I ought to use my Ruger 77 mkII 338 but I explain to them that it's like carrying around a fence post compared to the trapper (similar to their '06's). I have a Rem. mod.7 in 7mm08, with a nice Leopold 2x7 compact scope, but I always feel like I'm "cradling" it in my hands, whereas with the Trapper I can wrap one hand around the reciever and not give it a second thought. The Trapper will do everything that I need it to do, and with the less hassle. Plus I love levers and it's my pet.

[TCB in TN]

I happen to be a big 06 fan, and when you get into real long distance shooting and some real long hunting shots I would take it over the 30-30 and not blink. That said inside 130-150yards the 30-30 in a trapper with open sights suits me just fine. With the new Hornady rounds I would bump that on out a little, add a decent low power scope (I know heresy, but my eyes need the help on out there) and I wouldn't care to take it on out to 200-250.

[bogus bill]

My longest deer shot was with my 94 30/30. 220 yards near as I could pace up a long mountain slope. I bought the gun new in about 1955 when I was a kid. I added a williams foolproof and a pad because I am big. I probley shouldnt have tried the shot. It was snowing wet flakes. It was the last few minuets of the season. I held high with the bead looking like a basketball at that distance over his shoulder. Actualy the buck was quarted towards me looking back and down at me. I had to wipe the wet snow off my glass,s and reaim. He went down instantly. I walked and walked my partner didnt belive me and I couldnt find him. Finaly I walked even higher up the slope puzzeled and there he laid. Much farther than I thought. The bullet had went through his eye, and out his head!
It was a conservative 220 yards.

[20cows]

They can't seem to fathom why I want to hunt with such a tiny little "toy"...

I don't think anybody who thinks they're a toy has ever shot one, particularly not with a full power load.

[J Miller]

They can't seem to fathom why I want to hunt with such a tiny little "toy"...

I don't think anybody who thinks they're a toy has ever shot one, particularly not with a full power load.

Full power load? Is there any other kind???? I shoot mine with full power 150gr loads. No recoil to speak of, but muzzle blast is ....... well, LOUD!!!


Joe

[gundownunder]

Funny how people keep calling the 30-30 a 100yd rifle.
I call my 357 a 100yd rifle and I'm thinking of getting a 30-30 as my long range rifle.

[cshold]

Funny how people keep calling the 30-30 a 100yd rifle.
I call my 357 a 100yd rifle and I'm thinking of getting a 30-30 as my long range rifle.

Yes it is.
Heck the woods I generally hunt in, if it's more than a 50 to 60 yard
shot it's considered a very long shot.

[slimster]

Thanks for the great input guys. My thoughts were that even with the short barrel, the Trapper, with modern loads, was still more potent than the original 30-30 "wonder gun" of 1895, and still people have the opinion that it's not enough, simply because it has a shorter barrel!

[O.S.O.K.]

The only thing that is gained for most thin skinned game with increasing power levels in the same calber - ie: 30-30 to 30-06 for example is range.

You do begin to see a penetration/effectiveness difference close in with larger bodied animals - like beginning with mule deer bucks or large northern whitetail. But that's a shot placement issue primarily or just another limit on distance to the shot.

Your rifle with 170 grain softpoints exiting the muzzle at 2000 fps is more than plenty out to 200+ yards on whitetail if you can place the bullet. IMHO.

[Travis Morgan]

They can't seem to fathom why I want to hunt with such a tiny little "toy"...

I don't think anybody who thinks they're a toy has ever shot one, particularly not with a full power load.

Full power load? Is there any other kind???? I shoot mine with full power 150gr loads. No recoil to speak of, but muzzle blast is ....... well, LOUD!!!


Joe

I backed my current load off two tenths when I noticed that the whole rifle was flexing and whipping when I fired it. I need to work up something a bit lighter for the boy, or just use factory ammo.

[J Miller]

Many summers ago when I was just starting to reload I started off with the traditional DuPont IMR 3031 and IMR4895 powders. The problem with those in days gone by is there isn't a real consistent factory duplication load listed. And since there was no such thing as a personal chronograph I keep looking for a true factory duplication load.
Somewhere I picked up one of the early Winchester loading data pamphlets. It listed loads that were all but identical to Winchesters factory offerings. The first one I tried was 34.5grs of Win748 under a 150gr bullet. At the range that load shot to the same point of impact at all ranges I shot it at as the equivalent factory load.

That load became my go to load for the 30-30s. All of them. After over 30 years I still use that load. It still matches the factory loads.
And to tie it into this thread, it is very accurate out of my Trapper.

I don't load my 30-30s hot. There is no reason to. If more is needed, get a 308 or an '06.

Joe

[jlchucker]

Slimster,

If you can put the bullet where it needs to be out to 200 yds, that Trapper will get the job done.

I'll bet those that said you were handicapping yourself wanted to recommend a big fat magnum of some kind too.
At any rate, most magnum lovers today have no real hunting experience to base their prejudices on. They just regurgitate what they've read in Guns and Ammo and the other rags.

Deer haven't changed in the last 110 years. The 30-30 of 1895 stomped them then, and with the better ballistics of today it can stomp them now.

Take your Trapper hunting and enjoy it.

Joe

Joe, you are absolutely right. The regurgitation of gun rags is why I no longer subscribe to any of them. Just think of how many "hunters" write in asking about the 44 magnum's use for "protection against bears", then badmouth that cartridge as being too small for deer. Then there are those mag writers who one month tout the 30-30 cartridge in their columns as a whiz-bang load for big game in contender handguns, then the next month badmouth it in a Marlin or Winnie as being less than adequate for deer. There's too much hogwash being written in the gun mags these days, and too many boneheads who swallow all of that rubbish. I'll echo your sentiments: Take the trapper hunting and enjoy it. It's certainly up to the job for a hunter--but probably not for a magazine-reader.

[Travis Morgan]

I look at it like this: Indians killed Buffalo with bow, arrows, and sharp sticks. A .30-30 is a darn sight better than a sharp stick. It was the 300 Win. mag. of it's day. People were killing every darned critter o earth with it.

When the .357 came out(in 1920?), users were warned that they would very possibly break their hand just firing it. Now, it's poo-poohed as medium caliber. If I'm not mistaken, Col. Townsend Whelen killed an elephant with one, using frontal brain shots, though he advised he'd rather not have to do it again.

The whole point is, your .30-30 will do whatever you want, in it's range. Some calibers just do it better, or for longer distances.