30-30 vs 35 Remington

[getitdone1]

Wondering if any of you have compared these two great cartridges on game?

Just seen a slick looking Marlin Marauder with 16 1/4" bbl on the internet chambered for 35 Remington. Be a pleasure to carry that one.

I believe, generally, the 35 Remington is considered more potent than the 30-30. When I think of the 170 gr 30-30 velocity of about 2100 fps and the 200 gr 35 Remington velocity of about 2000--I can't see much difference in effect on game. That's theory but wondering how they actually compare in the field.

Don

[Hobie]

Both the bullets can go to 2100 fps from carbines. I think there is a difference in raw performance in favor of the .35 Rem but not enough that the .30 WCF user is noticeably handicapped. HOWEVER, I think the .30 is more versatile for the handloader.

[Pisgah]

To me, it is almost a toss-up between the .30-30 and the .35. Hand either of them to me, and I will go hunt with it, happily. Given a choice, if my greatest concern was penetration on larger animals, I would lean towards the .35; if the concern was the flattest trajectory, the .30-30. Truthfully, though, the differences are small, and I wouldn't criticize anyone who chose one over the other. "Paper ballistics" mean virtually nothing, and in practical results they are darned near identical.

[horsesoldier03]

Both are great cartridges. IMO, I would opt for the 30-30 because it will cleanly kill any game in my area. If I lived in an area that had a bear population, I would probably opt for the .35 REM simply because of the extra bullet weight and greater diameter. You cant beat the price on a box of 30-30 shells, its about the cheapest centerfire rifle to buy bullets for over the counter, and they are sold everywhere!

[El Chivo]

of course you are splitting hairs, but it depends on the bullet weight you choose. If you compare the 30-30 with 170's, it beats the 35 Rem 200's after only 50 yards, because it retains energy better. You would have to shoot 220's in the 35 Rem to get a similar energy retention curve, or compare it to 150's in the 30-30.

If you're comparing 150's to 200's and 170's to 220's, you're going to see a bigger difference in velocities and trajectory between the two cartridges than you might think. Bottom line, 35 Rem for shorter shots or bigger game.

[stretch]

The 30-30 has the edge in ballistic coeffecient, but the
35 is close with the hotter loadings. The 2 advantages
of the 35 Remington are the heavier-weight bullets it
can use, and the unassailable fact that it makes a bigger
hole in whatever you hit with it. Moose or bear up close, the
35 wins. Anything smaller and it's a toss-up.

I admit to a not entirely logical preference for the 35 Rem.

-Stretch

[Bigahh]

I guess a person would absolutely have to have both to even things out !

[Hobie]

I guess a person would absolutely have to have both to even things out !

That has been my tactic. I have 3 - .30s and 3 - .35s...

[DerekR]

I've been deer hunting with the .35 since I was 14 years old. I own one .35 and four 30/30s. I'm not sure how many deer I've killed with the .35 Rem, but it is more than every other gun I own. I have found the .35 Rem to be quite a bit better killer than the 30/30. I use factory 200 Core-Lockts, by the way. I have never found the 30/30 lacking, mind you, but ballistics don't tell the whole story on the .35 Remington.

[Jeff H]

As irrelevant as it may be, I would succumb to the "cool factor" of the .35.
I can't take a lot of recoil and a "bigger" bore would be cool. I am thinking it would be something I could shoot at the velocities the .35 moves things. I recenlty sold a '95 Mauser that I had wanted for years to make into a .35 Remington. I have just always thought the old cartridge was cool. Nothing against the 30-30 though. Like someone has already said - you can get a box of 30-30s about anywhere and they are one of the least expensive centerfires to buy ammo for. Actually, I can't remember the last time I bought ammo...... but it was $6 a box everywhere you went for a long time.

[earlmck]

Like several of you fellows I like 'em both and have 3 of the 30's and 2 35's with another 35 in the future. But for 35 fans who reload there is one more bullet option that puts the 35 ballistically ahead of the 30/30: the Hornady 180 grain spitzer. My 35s like this bullet the best for accuracy, and at 2300 fps (that is with 36.5 grains of RL10x) it will outflat and outpower the 30/30. This bullet was built for the 35 rem on the Contender, but my Marlins don't hold that against it. And I have never shot a game animal with it, so do not yet know about that aspect of it.

Yeah, it is a pointy thing: use it as a 2-shooter if that worries you. If anybody has game animal shooting experience with this bullet I wouldn't mind hearing about it. Good chance it'll go deer hunting with me this year if I can snag a tag...

[86er]

In the booklet 1000 Tags Filled by Josef A. Riekers and John C. Clark the 30-30 is represented in nearly 200 incidents on game. The bullet weights range from 125 - 190 grains. The range goes from 11 yards to 146 yards and the animals are comprised mostly of deer, hogs and black bear but there are nine animals that are elk-sized too. Overall, the caliber needed more than one shot to bring down game about half the time. It also needed more than two shots about 1/5 of the time. Collectively, it resulted in as many unrecovered animals as any other caliber that had a similar # of incidents and accounted for unrecovered game, and more than most. It also resulted in animals travelling the furthest distance after being shot in total percentage. Personally, I have shot 10 animals with the 30-30 and coincidence or not I have had about the same results, with two unrecovered (WTD, 100 yards, chest shot), 77 yard run after being shot and two animals needing two shots. A shoulder or heart shot put the animal down on the spot just less than 50% of the time. I recovered a bullet - or piece of 6 out of 10 times.

The 35 Remington is represented only 30 times in the booklet. There is one incident each of 150 and 180 grain bullets and three incidents with 220 grain bullets. All other bullets are 200 grain. The ranges are from 11 yards to 125 yards and the game runs from blackbuck antelope (70 pounds) to yak (700 pounds) with most being WTD, black bear and hogs. Data shows a second shot was needed about 1/5 of the time and more than two shots were needed 2 times out of the 30 incidents (one being the yak that took 3 shots). The average distance from shot to recovered animal is about 45 yards. A shoulder or heart shot put the animal down on the spot about 50% of the time. By the way, in my Maine bear camps for the past 7 years the 35 Remington is the only cartridge that has been 100%. That is - one shot resulted in a dead bear that was easily recovered every time it was used. I have personally shot 10 animals with my 35 Remington's now. Two deer shot at 100 yds each ran 50 yards. Two hogs that were not shot perfectly ran 50 yards each. One hog ran 20 yards. The other 5 animals dropped on the spot. I recovered just one bullet - one that went through one hog and hit another. That bullet killed both of them and was in the off-side of the second hog. All other animals were pass-through with good sign of exit expansion.

In my observations over the year with clients an personally, the 35 Rem with 200 grain bullet does cause greater wound channels when compared to 30-30 regardless of the bullet type and weight. Granted, a dead animal is a dead animal. However, the data doesn't lie. Statistically with a reasonable sample the 35 Rem is more effective on game when you consider exit wounds, number of shots needed, and distance game travelled after being shot.

If you would like a copy of 1000 Tags Filled you can e-mail me or go to www.huntingtheintroducedspecies.com It was printed for just this type of comparison.

[2ndovc]

I'd be all over that Marauder. They didn't make many of them and are quite hard to find.

I've become a huge fan of the .35 rem over the last couple years. I find it to be a very accurate and pleasant shooting
cartridge. I haven't hunted with it yet but plan to change that as soon as possible.

jb

[damienph]

I guess a person would absolutely have to have both to even things out !

That has been my tactic. I have 3 - .30s and 3 - .35s...

To really even things out, you should add a 32 Special; or three for you Hobie.

But to get back on topic; I think that you would be happy with the Marauder in 35 Remington. At least I know that I would be.

I have all three; 30-30, 32 Special and 35 Remington; I can't really tell much difference between the three, I am fairly certain that the deer can't either.

[Blaine]

Since you can't much tell the differenct between 'em...that's why I use a .444 or a 45-70

[damienph]

Since you can't much tell the differenct between 'em...that's why I use a .444 or a 45-70

Well, I also have a 375BB, my 444P and my old 45-70 Buffalo Classic. I can tell the difference between those three and the first three. However, I'll admit depending on how they are loaded sometimes I can't tell the difference between the last three!

[FWiedner]

I've always thought of the .30-30 and the .35Rem as ballistically similar, with the .35 but leaving in a bigger hole (larger permanent wound channel). In my primitive analysis, bigger holes bleed more.

That said, and reflecting on Joe's evaluation above, of many hogs I've shot I've only lost one while using the .30-30 170gr. It was during a night hunt and I believe that because it was close range I shot low. The fact remains that the bullet stuck the animal and he headed for the brush, never to be seen again.

I don't have a .35Rem, per se, but I do have a pair of .356Win. No animal has yet survived an encounter with either of those rifles, using either 200gr or 250gr bullets.

So I'd have to ask, is the .30-30 simply anemic, or are .30-30 hunters simply poor marksmen? In my case I know the answer.

[Old Savage]

Well apparently there is a difference between the 30-30 and the 35 Rem in effectiveness. Thanks Joe!