Question for 86er Ref: 35 Rem vs 30 WCF

[J Miller]

Joe,

In this thread:
http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=29173
you made a comparison between the 35 Rem and the 30 WCF:

This gun should serve it's niche nicely. We have the chance to shoot a lot of hogs from 25 yds to 50 yds. That is the same range as my bear baits. The 30-30 I was using was inconsistent on both. The 35 has proven 100% one shot dead bears on our ME hunts for years. Recently, I've seen it work well on hogs, more consistently at close range that a lot of other, faster and lighter bullets. I don't mean to open a can or worms. My observations have been that the 35 had a slight edge for this type of application over the 30-30 and many other cartridges.

Being a long time fan of the 30-30 cartridge I was wondering if you'd elaborate on why you think this is so. If it's a bullet weight thing, then would upping the 30-30 weight to say 190 grs bring them to equal grounds, ~or~ is it a diameter thing, ~or~ perhaps both?

Joe

[86er]

I don't know the answer, Joe. Mike Rintoul once told me " A bullet's gonna do what a bullet's gonna do". Of six recent hog kills with 30-30 using the same factory 170 grain ammo the hunters experienced everything from pass throughs, recovered expanded bullet, recovered non-expanded bullet, dead right there and 100 yard tracking jobs. In that same time frame there were seven hog kills with 35 Rem caliber all with 200 grain Federal blue box ammo. One bullet was recovered and it was expanded a little. It was a partial quartering to shot and the penetration was about 2 feet. The other six were pass throughs that showed some sign of penetration. These seven were all recovered within 50 yards and had more pronounced steady blood trails than the ones hit with 30-30. All the shots were into or just behind the shoulder and from stands at 50 yards. The bottom line is that all the pigs are dead and recovered. Ricky recently shot a big boar at 15 yards with a 7mm-08 using a 140gr Accubond. A good shoulder shot exited and showed expansion. He had a spotty blood trail that went just over 100 yards. Dead pig at the end of it though.

I've posted the bear data many times. For cartridges that were used more than 2 times the 35 Rem remains the only cartridge that has resulted in a one shot - one dead bear 100% of the time. Very few have travelled out of sight of the bait stand. These shots are up to 38 yards and as close as 11 yards. The bears are 150-250 pounds generally. The 30-30 is another very popular cartridge on the bear hunts with our clients. It has resulted in bang-flops and it has also resulted in go look for the bear and shoot it again. One big difference is that the 35 has always been a 200 grain bullet and almost all the bear hunters used factory remington core lokt. The 30-30 has varied in bullet weight and manufacturer, typically 150 or 170 but some 130's, some cast bullets and some 160 LeverEvolutions. The most popular cartridge among clients is the 30-06. It has earned about 75% one shot -one kill performance. Again, the load and rifles vary greatly. The next best performers after the 35 Rem on the bear hunts are 12 gauge all lead slugs followed by 50 caliber muzzleloaders with expanding bullets of some sort (Powerbelt and Barnes are most popular).

Frankly, the data pool is not that big. I'm looking at 30 to 35 animals all inclusive with the 35 Rem compared to well over 100 animals with the 30-30. The 35 has shown more consistent performance but the data could be skewed in a number of ways and thereby create an anomoly. A pure guess as to why the 35 seems to perform more consistently is the larger frontal diameter, the consistency in bullet weight and contruction and possible the experience of the user. Also, in my test of yesterday, the 35 Rem bullet performs consistently over a wide range of impact velocity where the .308 bullets designed for 30-30's performance is a little more effected by impact velocity. In this data pool more experienced hunters used the 35 than the 30-30. Slight differences in shot placement due to skill or familiarity with the animals anatomy would make a difference.

Again, I don't want to open a can of worms. I don't have enough proof or confidence yet to get into a debate. I based my decision to switch to the 35 Rem on personal observations and comparisons on actual hunts for game I'd use it on. My 35 Rem will be used on deer, hogs and black bears out to 100 yds from a stand or in a bushveldt, forest, thicket type terrain. It gives me a little more confidence in getting a quick kill or at least a more pronounced blood trail. The gun is as accurate or slightly more-so than my 30-30 I have now. Additionally, my Win 94 cannot wear a scope where the 35 Rem can. The hogs and bears will be taken in low or artificial light, so any added punch or increased blood trail is advantageous. I could have used any # of bolt guns or my Savage 99 in 308 but a big consideration is the tree stand scenario. The other guns could discharge if they fall from the tree, even with a good safety mechanism, because after all they are still cocked. Hopefully, the levergun with the hammer down will greatly reduce the possibility of a discharge should the rifle fall from the tree. I like the lever action because these situations sometimes allow for a second shot if you can work the action fast enough and get a second sight picture. This Marlin 35 Rem caliber fits all this criteria for a rifle plus the caliber give me a perceived edge compared to the 30-30.

[Blaine]

I'd like to think that one would even up the 30wcf a bit by loading premium bullets....

[J Miller]

Joe,

Thanks for the response. I'm going to cogitate on it for a while.
I may up my bullets to the 170gr and see if my rifles show any accuracy preferences. I got some of that weight to try today, so we'll see.

Joe

[86er]

I did not jump into the 35 without giving the 30-30 a real chance first. I recently reported on the 170 gr Nosler Partition compared to cup and core bullets in the 30-30. I was surprised and disappointed with the Partition. Although my testing consisted of only 5 Partions and 3 Remington Core Lokts and 2 Speer FP's at the same velocity the results were consistent. The Noslers did not penetrate more nor expand wider than the conventional designs using dead hogs as ballilstic material. I did think the Partition would give a quicker result on deer with shoulder shots as the front frags pretty good. I did not test the Barnes X 150 grains although I would like to one day. Also, I reported that the Winchester combined technology Silvertip (black bullet with the plastic white tip) was used in an axis deer cull of over 40 animals and my friend Albert said it was the best bullet he's used in the 30-30 for instant results and consistent performance. I think the Barnes X and maybe the 190 grain Hawk bullets might even up the score some. Also, I've not personally used Grizzly Cartridge's 170 gr 30-30 but the bullet is custom made for them and the velocity is 2300 fps from a 20" barrel. Big Mike and Jorge (the Medina County Game Warden) both use Grizzly exclusively and report that they get better results on deer and medium ungulates than they see with their 308 Win's! Unfortunately, neither of them used them on hogs or bears so I don't have any results on those animals to compare. I just decided to use my Win 94 in 30-30 for deer, antelope and small game out to 125 yds where the iron sights become less precise for me. For the hogs and bears, the 45-70 was a natural choice that works great. However, the recoil is stout from a tree stand and my scope is a scout set-up so I loose the ability to use it in near darkness or artificial light. I've had great success with the 45-70 but among clients even that caliber hasn't held 100% like the 35 Rem has with nearly the same # of incidents.

[piller]

That is a lot to think about. Joe, have you had any clients use a .45-70 lever action on bears? It seems to me, even with my limited experience, that a .45-70 using a 400 grain premium bullet at about 1800 fps would work well. The soft point 405 grain bullets seem to be too soft after seeing the one recovered that I shot a hog with. The reason I am asking is that I want to go bear hunting and my choices in rifle would be Rem. 700 .30-06, Savage 200 7mm-08, Marlin 336 .30-30, Model 92 in .480 Ruger, or Guide Gun .45-70. For 75 yards or less, would the model 92 in .480 work with 400 grain JFP Speer bullets which I used on the Water Buffalo? I wouldn't use the JHP bullets as they don't have the statistics of penetrating more than about 12 inches in ballistic gelatin.

[86er]

Piller - any of your rifles will kill a bear deader than, well you know. The consideration is a compact rifle with a conventionally mounted scope that doesn't kick too much from the tree stand. I used my 45-70 with ghost ring sights and hit a bear four times before he got out of the open circle the bait was in. The 200 pound sow went about 25 yards after the last shot. My entry holes were a little high. When I put the scout scope on the rifle I couldn't make follow-up shots as fast as I needed before the bear was gone becaue with the recoil I lost the animal out of the scope for too long. I find the 35 kicks about like a full power load in the 30-30 and I can get a second sight picture pretty quick. As a client, you're not expected to shoot multiple shots. Just make the first shot count and we'll go find your bear together when I come get you from the stand. FWIW, the real fast cartridges are tough to get perfect performance out of at ranges under 40 yards. They are still going so fast the bullets have a hard time working like they're supposed to. This is probably why levergun cartridges, shotgun slugs and muzzleloaders are such good choices for close range bears over bait. Big handguns hold their own pretty well too. I am using my 35 Rem mostly for hogs out of a close range tree stand. An occassional opportunity for a deer could be cashed in on as well. I probably won't shoot any more bears in a hunting situation but this 35 Rem Marlin would be a good rifle to offer as a loaner for clients. We get a bunch of people that bring their kids or wives and sometimes they don't have enough rifles to go around.

[TedH]

That is a lot to think about. Joe, have you had any clients use a .45-70 lever action on bears?

Here's one of Joe's bears posing with my 45-70.

[FWiedner]

I don't use a .35Rem, but I do use a .356Win. Different but the same. Little faster, not much, but the same bullets.

The .356Win has been my primary for the last 20 years, but for the last 2 or 3 years I've been using a .30-30 pretty frequently. I switch between 200gr JSP and 250gr JSP for the .356, but I only use 170gr PP for the .30-30, and that's just because there's not been a heavier factory round.

Most of my hunting for the last few years has been hogs because I've got a friend whose farm I help to keep cleared. I've shot many deer, but no bear with either of these guns.

I've not lost an animal that's been shot with the .356, and the great majority of them have been DRT. I've lost one or two hogs using the .30-30, but I am convinced that was due to poorly placed shots more than any other consideration. Poorly aimed and rushed shots in low light. I've had at least one such shot that I can clearly recall with the .356; he was running and I was in a tree-stand with about 13-inches of lateral "swing" but the brute didn't take another step after a 200gr bullet passed through his neck behind the skull without breaking the neck. I don't know why he died, but he did. Concussion maybe.

I don't evaluate bullets and shots on game with the same educated scrutiny that Joe does. I only use: Did the bullet go where I aimed it; Did it go in deep enough; Did I kill the beast; and did I have to chase it. Beyond that, I know nothing.

I do know that bigger holes bleed more and that shot placement is everything. My .356 has never failed me, and my .30-30 has never failed me when I did my part.

Down to brass tacks... I'd pick the .356 every time if I had any doubt about which one would absolutely positively do the job.

[Griff]

Sure am glad I have a .375 Winchester to back up those puny ol' .30-30s! Joe, will call ya tomorrow or Thurs... ya'll goin' to be home?

[86er]

Since my last post in the past few hours I found out Jack's Dad had two hogs that were not fit for market. They were both domestic sows around 300 pounds. Already dead. I backed off 50 paces and fired away with the guns/loads I have been working with as close range medium duty rigs. We propped up the sows on their bellies and put them side by side. I rough measurement across the girth is around 22 inches. The rounds were 30-30 170gr Speer FP at listed mv of 2270 fps, 35 Rem 200 gr Rem CL at 2035 fps list, 300 Savage 180 gr factory loaded Win Silvertip, 308 Win with 170 gr Rem CL made for 30-30 at 2550 fps and two .451 diameter 240 gr lead bullets sabotted and fired from a 50 cal mzlder at 1850 fps mv (100 gr 777). Most interesting is that nearly all the bullet retained their total weight. The penetration was as follows, unscientifically measured: 30-30 19"; 35 Rem 22"; 300 Sav 16"; 308 Win 11"; 50 mzldr (2 shots) 15" and 18". The bullet weight may be a little high because I didn't clean any blood or meat out of them before weighing.


Here's the 30-30 170 gr Speer and the 35 Rem 200 grain Core-Lokt side by side for comparison:


Here's another view of the other side of the bullets all next to one another:


30-30 bullet

35 Rem bullet

50 Cal Muzzleloader bullet

300 Savage 180 gr Silvertip

[vancelw]

Veering even farther from the original post (I know you're interested, too Joe Miller )

86er, have you seen any Hornady 500 gr DGX bullets used on bear? Did they perform well or is the range too close to allow expansion?
Is expansion that critical if you're punching a half-inch hole all the way through the important parts (i.e. good shot placement) in a 250 pound bear?

[m.wun]

I recently did some soaked newsprint bullet tests and found the same results between
30-30 and 308 win.
308 150gr factory rem.
30-30 170gr hornady interlocks.
the 30-30 penetrated 8" deeper and a perfect mushroom.
the 308 bullet blew apart and stoped short.

[86er]

Vance-

A 500 grain DGX fired from what? This bullet does not expand at 45-70 velocities - I tried them up to 1550 - that's as fast as we could get them. I've shot them in my 450 NE at 2170 fps and they work great. You just don't need that weight for the bears we hunt in ME or in Canada. Personally, I'd rather have a bullet that expanded up to .50 that one that started there and remained solid. The 100 grain Nosler Partition fired from a 243 are pretty good on bear that are 25 yds from you!

[stretch]

I think the advantage of the 35 Remington over the 30-30 is that is just
makes a bigger hole. The 200 gr. bullet is more common in the factory
loading for the 35, and it's more accurate - at least in my 336.

The Remington Core-Lokt bullet is superb as well. The
front mushrooms, it holds together, retains most of it's weight,
it's accurate at hunting ranges, and it penetrates well.
That's all one can really ask of a hunting round.
True, the ballistic coeffecient isn't all it could be, but at 150 yards or
less the results are terrific.

The same can be said of the 170 Core-Lokt in the 30 WCF, but it makes
a smaller hole, and is lighter. Even though it might be going faster, any
controlled-expansion bullet in that caliber isn't going to "blow up" inside
the game, nor is it going to fragment. Might go through, as might the 35 Rem,
but it just leaves a smaller hole.

Methinks the difference in the size of that hole might make all the difference
between the field results we see.

Sorta like the difference 'tween the 9mm and the 45 ACP.

-Stretch

[vancelw]

Vance-

A 500 grain DGX fired from what? This bullet does not expand at 45-70 velocities - I tried them up to 1550 - that's as fast as we could get them. I've shot them in my 450 NE at 2170 fps and they work great. You just don't need that weight for the bears we hunt in ME or in Canada. Personally, I'd rather have a bullet that expanded up to .50 that one that started there and remained solid. The 100 grain Nosler Partition fired from a 243 are pretty good on bear that are 25 yds from you!

What's the matter, can't you read my mind? Sheesh. .45-70 of course.

The load data I have shows 1500+fps to be about the limit like you say.

I might just try my 325 FTX load on a bear. Kinda like F. Weidner said, I shot twice and had two dead deer, so what's not to like?

[J Miller]

Stretch,

I'd just about come to that conclusion after I'd looked at the pictures 86er had posted. Especially the one that showed the bases of the bullets. Until then I was having difficulty visualizing the difference between a 30 cal and a 35 cal bullet.

Joe

[Old Savage]

Seems pretty obvious that the 35 Rem is superior to the 30-30 in this application with nothing to recommend the 30-30 in comparison.

[J Miller]

Seems pretty obvious that the 35 Rem is superior to the 30-30 in this application with nothing to recommend the 30-30 in comparison.

OS, It do seem you are right. What I wanted to know is why. On the surface it's obvious, a bigger diameter heavier vs a smaller dia and lighter bullet. Obvious, but being the mechanical type I am I wondered if there wasn't a less obvious more technical reason.

There's not.

Vance,
Glad you put those laughing smileys in there. Otherwise Joe might have turned loose one of those four horned rams from Hades on you

Joe

[Old Savage]

Joe here is one way I look at it. I put 39 gr of powder energy behind 200 gr to capture it vs 32 gr of the same powder with a 170 - anyway you cut it that is more smack down with no distance to help the 30-30 BC. Plus the frontal area - advantage 35 in every numerical category on these close shots. And, that large front area makes those bullets perform. Thanks 86er for all the info.

I don't think there is any magic in any of these bullets or calibers except that the combination of materials work together to produce the desired effect in certain situations.

[vancelw]

Vance,
Glad you put those laughing smileys in there. Otherwise Joe might have turned loose one of those four horned rams from Hades on you

Joe

and then charged me to shoot to save my own hide

[86er]

No mathematical formula captures everything going on with a bullet so as to express a real life measure of the bullets lethality. With that said, there are dozens of formulas out there to measure some parts of the bullets potential. What is good about a 30-30 v. 35 Rem comparison is that we can use the same bullet design (Rem Core-Lokt) and the same velocity. My 30-30 is loaded with 170's at 2080 fps because that load is accurate and sights in with the iron sights. The 35 Rem has a velocity of 2070 fps. Looking at various formulas you get the following:

TKD - 15/21
KE - 1632/1900
Mom- 50.5/59
OGW- 390/532

The #'s represent 30-30 / 35 Rem. If you bump up the 30-30 velocity to standard factory velocity of 2200 fps for the 170 gr you get:

TKD -16.4
KE- 1826
Mom -53.4
OGW- 461.5

Using my own formula discussed on one of my books, it takes into account the type of bullet. Since they are both cup and core style the values reflect that. The formula gives a minimum bullet weight for a known animal weight. If you express the difference in a whole # to make a comparison it is telling. Also, this formula takes into account a range up to 250 yards, not further and muzzle velocity of 2000-3000 fps. What is expressed is whether or not a caliber is adequate for the task. The whole # represent the % above adequate in 10's. So if the boars and bears are 200 pounds the forumula would say:

35 Rem - 5
30-30 - 1

You get this once the forumula takes into account the animal weight and bullet type and gives 79.36. You then divide the bullet weight we're working with (200 for 35 and 170 for 30-30). You get 2.520 for 35 and 2.142 for 30-30. Turn the first # after the decimal into a whole # and you get 5 and 1 respectively. In other words, the 35 Rem has an adequacy of + 50% where the 30-30 has an adequacy of + 10%. This means, in mathematical expression at least, the 35 is 40% more reliable on 200 pound animals at under 250 yds with equal shot placement as a 30-30. (200 gr and 170 gr bullets respectively @ same velocity).

Unfortunately there is not one premium bullet available for both cartridges, in other works the same design made for 30-30 or 35 Rem. If there was, let's say it is the Marchester Whacker. It is a bonded core, controlled expansion bullet. It is specifically designed for the cartridge it is intended for, including the velocity from that cartridge. If this bullet existed, my formula with the premium bullets actually make the 35 Rem and 30-30 neck and neck. The 35 Rem (200gr Whacker) would give a # of 3.831 while the 30-30 (170 gr Whacker) would give a # of 3.830. The whole # expression would be .01 for the 35 and .00 for the 30-30. This would mean the 30-30 is perfectly adequate for the 200 pound animals while the 35 Rem is only 1% more than adequate.

I know the question is coming. What about the new 190 grain 30-30 from Buffalo Bore? Consider the Hawk bullet is a cup and core design that is somewhat soft. Using my formula the 30-30 with the 190 grain would be .03% MORE adequate than the 200 gr 35 Rem. Basically a tie.

If you look at all the other formulas above and figure out the ratio of expressed advantage between the two, you will see that it works out closely across the board.

There is no way to explain why one cartridge/bullet/velocity is more consistent or has different performance that another in real hunting situations. There are too many variables to capture with mathematical equations. All the formulas either lack consideration of an influence or rely unequally on one element.

I stick to what Rintoul said: " A bullet's gonna do what a bullet's gonna do".

[Jason_W]

I'm of the opinion that it is neither energy nor depth of penetration that kill, but volume of destroyed tissue. Penetration and energy contribute to destroyed tissue, but they are not the full story. I think bore diameter helps as well, but I also think there might be a lot of X factors at play.

It's all very fascinating.

[Old Savage]

.358 bullet has approx. 1/3 more frontal area than a .308 bullet.

[Jason_W]

This would make an interesting statistical study. There are a lot of variables, though.

[Griff]

I'm rather simplistic. "Simple" if you'd rather state it like that.

So, I'm firmly in the camp that sez a .30-30 CAN do it all... but not better than some other cartridges. It's why I have guns in other calibers. As far as I'm concerned, the .30-30 is perfect for deer sized game and smaller at reasonable ranges for the shooter's capabilities. Ergo, different ranges for different folks.

I'd never argue that a .30-30 can't take larger game... but... there are BETTER choices out there. Hogs might just be that borderline case for the .30-30. Joe's data supports that. Maybe I'll have to loan Joe my 375 Marlin and some ammo to do some comparisons with. Lord knows I don't shoot it much! Wonder how it compares to the 35 Rem.

[J Miller]

I'd love to volunteer my 30-30(s) for testing too .... but only if I'm with 'em.
I'm following this thread as carefully as I can. And it fascinates me. What I see is; the 30-30 can do it all, but not as well as some other rounds.
I'd love to pop some piggies with various 30-30 loads as a comparison test with other cartridges. I doubt we could change Joe's existing findings until we got away from the lighter bullets.
But it would be educational and fun.

JMHO

Joe

[Jason_W]

I'm thinking of more of a research survey. Questions like:

1. What cartridge

2. What animal

3. Approximate range

4. Where on the animals anatomy was it hit?

5. How far did the animal run after being hit?

Of course, limitations of such a survey is that people could lie, or have inadvertently fudged details in their mind. We all know how perceptions can change with the adrenaline flows.

Forum discussions are fun, but we are admittedly dealing with a very small sample size. I would like to see the results of 1000 30-30 hunts vs. 1000 .35 Rem hunts.

[J Miller]

I'm thinking of more of a research survey. Questions like:

1. What cartridge

2. What animal

3. Approximate range

4. Where on the animals anatomy was it hit?

5. How far did the animal run after being hit?

Of course, limitations of such a survey is that people could lie, or have inadvertently fudged details in their mind. We all know how perceptions can change with the adrenaline flows.

Forum discussions are fun, but we are admittedly dealing with a very small sample size. I would like to see the results of 1000 30-30 hunts vs. 1000 .35 Rem hunts.

Jason,
I like your idea. I'll still volunteer my 30-30s for the tests.
Now about the fudging of ranges, many people can't accurately estimate ranges. I'm so out of practice I'd need a range finder to be sure.
So that would be a question for the survey. Was the range estimated, or determined with a range finder?

Joe

[Jason_W]

I'm thinking of more of a research survey. Questions like:

1. What cartridge

2. What animal

3. Approximate range

4. Where on the animals anatomy was it hit?

5. How far did the animal run after being hit?

Of course, limitations of such a survey is that people could lie, or have inadvertently fudged details in their mind. We all know how perceptions can change with the adrenaline flows.

Forum discussions are fun, but we are admittedly dealing with a very small sample size. I would like to see the results of 1000 30-30 hunts vs. 1000 .35 Rem hunts.

Jason,
I like your idea. I'll still volunteer my 30-30s for the tests.
Now about the fudging of ranges, many people can't accurately estimate ranges. I'm so out of practice I'd need a range finder to be sure.
So that would be a question for the survey. Was the range estimated, or determined with a range finder?

Joe

I'm going to look online and see if I can find a free survey form generator. It would be interesting to see not only the real world effect of various firearms on game, but to also see what a majority of people are using for a hunting firearm.

[w30wcf]

Joe,
Interesting thread. Thank yous to 86er for his exhaustive testing!
Technically speaking, all other things being equal (bullet construction, impact velocity, twist rate, etc.), the higher the sectional density, the likelyhood of deeper penetration.
.30 / 170 gr. s.d. = .256
.35 / 200 gr. s.d. = .223

.30 / 190 gr. s.d. = .286
.35 / 220 gr. s.d. = .245

As we can see, the.30 has the higher s.d. in the examples above. The heavier bullet weight of the .35 would possibly be a factor.

As far as expansion goes, remember these charts from 1951? Nice mushrooms ... look to be about .56".... all the way out to 200 yards.





w30wcf

[J Miller]

w30wcf,

I haven't seen those pictures in a quite a while. I thought I'd saved them. I will this time for sure.

Joe