The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 8, 2011, 06:57 PM   #1
rmocarsky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Posts: 374
.35 Rem. vs. 30-30

Gunners,


I have both and the son of the owner of the farm I hunt on borrowed my .35 last deer season.

He asked me if the .35 was more powerful than the 30.30, and I replied ``Yeah, but I don't think it is by all that much.''

In fact, just how do the two stack up against each other?

I loaned him the rifle and 200 grain Remington core lokt ammo.

I know many of you are absolute experts on this matter, and I admit that I am not.

Rmocarsky

Last edited by rmocarsky; August 8, 2011 at 06:59 PM. Reason: punctuation
rmocarsky is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 07:12 PM   #2
BruceM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Used to be that the .35 Remington was a little better for critters larger than deer, say Black Bears and such and you got a better blood trail from the .35 if needed. That said, on whitetail deer sized game, it's six of one, half dozen of the other when comparing the .35 Remington to the .30-30 Winchester.



Bruce
BruceM is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 07:19 PM   #3
Murrdock
Member
 
Join Date: March 22, 2011
Location: Northern Maine
Posts: 74
200 grain bullets vs. 160's out of a 30-30.

I guess it's personal preference but I prefer my .35 Remington to a 30-30 for deer-bear hunting, though a 30-30 is far easier to find ammo for in backwoods "stores", but if your worried about that then your not prepared anyways.
__________________
Quote:
Single action is too much to fiddle with when you're being murdered by a bear.
Murrdock is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 07:20 PM   #4
PawPaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2010
Location: Central Louisiana
Posts: 3,115
Yeah, between the .30-30 and the .35 Remington, take your choice. In the .35 Remington I like that 200 grain Core-Lokt ammo, but I don't know if it knocks them over any quicker than the 170 grain from the .30-30. They're both great deer cartridges. Take your choice.
__________________
Dennis Dezendorf

http://pawpawshouse.blogspot.com
PawPaw is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 07:29 PM   #5
Abel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Posts: 1,161
I have both & hunt with both. They both will do the job. The 35 Rem is my favorite between the two and I hunt with it more often. Ammo for the 35 is more expensive.
Abel is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 07:44 PM   #6
TXGunNut
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: If you have to ask...
Posts: 2,860
Tough choice, the 35 hits a bit harder and may penetrate a bit better but both are fine leverguns for deer hunting. 30-30 is a bit easier to feed but for a hunter who reloads there isn't much difference. I have both, of course.
__________________
Life Member NRA, TSRA
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call Lonesome Dove
My favorite recipes start out with a handful of used wheelweights.
TXGunNut is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 08:15 PM   #7
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,178
The older guys used to swear the 35 put deer down quicker, but in the real world I seriously doubt there is a bit of difference except in our minds. If you think one is better than the other, then you will shoot with more confidence.

For all practical purposes I think the 30-30 is the slightly better round. The ones I've shot seem a touch more accurate and give a bit more range. There are have been a lot more advancements in .30 bullets giving the 30-30 a slight edge with hi-tech bullets and loads as well. I know Hornady offers their soft pointy bullets in 35 as well, but they just don't help as much as with the .30 cal bullets.

Of course the 35 works great and wins points for coolness. It is a win-win with either round.
jmr40 is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 08:27 PM   #8
Antique Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 13, 2010
Location: South Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 104
.35 Remington all the way. I hunt deer with a Remington 760 gamemaster in
.35 rem. I use 150 grain PSP core lokts and it does quite a number on them. The .35 is a great brush gun. It has a big enough projectile going relativley slow, so it doesn't get thrown off path if it hits a twig. I think the 760 and .35 rem go perfectly for hunting in thick woods. Big bullet with power, and fast reloading.

I am not a fan of the 30-30. It just seems to go too slow for a .30 caliber, without the extra punch. Just my take on it.

Antique Shooter
Antique Shooter is offline  
Old August 8, 2011, 08:37 PM   #9
tony pasley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2006
Location: western north carolina
Posts: 1,399
In the mountians with laurel thickets and other brush to shoot thru the .35 is the better bullet. The more open country it is a toss up.
__________________
'It has been said that politics is the
second oldest profession. I have learned
that it bears a striking resemblance
to the first.' - Ronald Reagan
tony pasley is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 03:45 AM   #10
bamaranger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 4,488
holy grail

My great uncle and grandad always maintained that the .35 with heavy (200) bullet was a better killer on deer than the .30-30. They used the .35 in 14 and 141 Rems, iron sights, hunting from the ground in woodland. Ranges would have been short, under 100, often half that.

Never killed a deer w/ a .35 myself. I hunted a M94 in .30-30 for a few years, and never had any complaints, all shots 50 yds or less.
bamaranger is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 05:59 AM   #11
Magnum Wheel Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2006
Location: Southern Minnesota
Posts: 8,552
40 S&W is better than 9mm... oh wait... that wasn't the question ??? or was it

the 35 Remington is going to carry more energy, & if both are fitted with bullets that properly perform for the task at hand, the 35 should more easily put deer down as well...

that's not to say the 30-30 isn't a great woods deer cartridge, just that the 35 "should" be a bit better...
__________________
In life you either make dust or eat dust...
Magnum Wheel Man is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 06:48 AM   #12
Big Pard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 183
As having both and killing deer with each I'd have to give the nod to the 35 for killing power. I like the Hornady Leverevoluton because it gives these two work horses more distance.. You really can't go wrong with either...
Big Pard is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 07:48 AM   #13
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,599
Opinions are fine, but maybe somebody could post a couple of comparatives for bullet weight and muzzle velocity?
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 08:01 AM   #14
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,178
http://www.hornady.com/store/30-30-W...EVERevolution/

http://www.hornady.com/store/35-Rem-...EVERevolution/

This is from Hornady's website with their leverevolution ammo. The 35 has about 50 ft. lbs advantage at 100 yards
jmr40 is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 03:36 PM   #15
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 2,371
If you guys can definitively prove which one is best, I can use that info to finally end the argument (aka the 30 Years War) with my Dad. I'm a 35 guy and he's a 30/30 guy. I honestly don't think there's enough difference to pick a winner, but....I'm still a 35 guy. I'm also a Dallas Cowboys guy, and Dad is a Saints guy. I'm a Braves fan and he's a Yankees fan. And on and on it goes. But on caibers, both Dad and I finally became 270 fans, though I had to buy him one to turn him into a fan- but he loves that Ruger Ultralight in 270.
603Country is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 04:28 PM   #16
idek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2009
Posts: 617
Here's data from a ballistics chart I have. These match Remington Core-Lokt specs.

.35 Remington
.......... Velocity Energy Trajectory (based on 100 yard zero)
150 grain bullet:
muzzle... 2300... 1762... -1.5
100 yd... 1874... 1169... 0.0
200 yd... 1506... 755... -8.6
300 yd... 1218... 494... -32.7

200 grain bullet:
muzzle... 2080... 1921... -1.5
100 yd... 1698... 1280... 0.0
200 yd... 1376... 841... -10.7
300 yd... 1140... 577... -40.0

.30-30 Win.
150 grain bullet:
muzzle... 2390... 1902... -1.5
100 yd... 2040... 1386... 0.0
200 yd... 1723... 989... -6.9
300 yd... 1447... 697... -25.7

170 grain bullet:
muzzle... 2200... 1827... -1.5
100 yd... 1895... 1355... 0.0
200 yd... 1619... 989... -8.3
300 yd... 1381... 720... -29.9

*Note: I realize these aren't 300-yard cartridges, but I figured I'd include that distance anyway since I had the data.

The differences aren't huge. The better ballistic coefficients of the narrower .30-30 bullets result in better energy retention and slightly flatter trajectories. If I expected to take longer shots, I'd maybe opt for the .30-30.

It's probably more about one's preference of bullet types. .35 Remington bullets might be a little more jarring and create broader wound channels, while .30-30 bullets of comparable weight may penetrate a little deeper due to greater sectional density.

Last edited by idek; August 9, 2011 at 04:35 PM.
idek is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 06:27 PM   #17
ratshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 22, 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 766
I doubt there is enough difference to matter between the two. Put it where it needs to go and either one should work equally well.

Since brass and bullets are easier to find the 30-30 would be my choice. I used to want a 35 remington in the worst way until I found I can shoot 200gr bullets from my Marlin 94 at over 2000fps and that will match the 35 in energy. The 35 will outpace the 44 but where I hunt and mostly how I hunt a 100 yard shot is a long shot. I love to scout the trails and then lay in wait and make a close range kill.

The 35 may start out bigger but with the extra velocity to expand the bullet that the 30-30 has I would guess in the end the wound channels are close in size.

My pick would be the 30WCF just because componants are so easy to find. I just bought once fired brass and got 500 pieces for less than $40 bucks. Its hard to even find 35 remington brass and when you do it is expensive.
__________________
Have you ever danced with the Devil in the pale moonlight?

A village in Kenya called. They want their idiot back.
ratshooter is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 09:02 PM   #18
Big Pard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 183
Its hard to define "best" in rifle cartridges since animals expire to only one degree of dead. "Better suited" would be a better term to select calibers or cartridges for specific purposes or game and shouldn't be confined to any one round in particular.
Big Pard is offline  
Old August 9, 2011, 09:36 PM   #19
Abel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2006
Posts: 1,161
There is nothing that the 30-30 does that the 35 can't do just a smidge better. Except go easier on your wallet.

Last edited by Abel; August 9, 2011 at 09:54 PM.
Abel is offline  
Old August 10, 2011, 09:06 AM   #20
cat9x
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 17, 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 212
the .35Rem also makes a bigger hole. Plus you can get it with 15 round magazines
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC08649.jpg (135.2 KB, 92 views)
cat9x is offline  
Old August 10, 2011, 09:15 PM   #21
federali
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2011
Location: Nassau County NY
Posts: 378
As both calibers are essentially woods calibers very popular in the east, a whitetail deer or black bear probably won't know the difference between the two.

But, and it's a big but, if you go to the various Marlin 336 forums, you'll find that many, many people have problems with light hits on .35 Remington handloads. I just had a brand new spring installed in my 336 and still had a light hit on carefully assembled loads. The cartridge headspaces on that wrinkle they call a shoulder. The cartridge remains popular inspite of itself.

My recommendation is: if you only use factory ammo, either caliber will do. If you plan to reload, go with the .30-30.
__________________
Int'l Assoc. of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors
federali is offline  
Old September 3, 2013, 08:41 AM   #22
nitro-express
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 10, 2011
Posts: 9
Reloading for the 35 Rem.

I would like to add my 0.02$, maybe shed some light on the handloads issue.

First, I would rather carry a 35 Rem into the bush, I feel more confident in it's ability to wack a deer or black bear. Next would be a 30-30 with 170's in bear country, or the 125 Federal for deer. The 125 Federal is quite a killer.

Shoulder setback is a concern with the 35 Rem, it will cause misfires. Light loads are an issue, after firing the shoulder will be set back and one thing reloading dies can't do is push the shoulder forward. I use the Hornady tool to check the shoulder setback of my reloads. I like to have a thou or 2 "clearance", avoiding "difficult to chamber" ammunition. I've had no issues since.
nitro-express is offline  
Old September 3, 2013, 09:46 AM   #23
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 20,015
I remember having this discussion around 1950. Hasn't changed.

The problem I have with the .35 Remington is that its small shoulder doesn't provide adequate case support all the time, and misfires are fairly common. Other than that, as folks have said, hunting success depends a lot less on the bullet and paper figures than on putting that bullet in the right place.

I once had a discussion with an old timer in PA. He told me he got his deer (both the legal ones and maybe a few others) with a .22 Hornet. I said that seemed a little light, and asked him at what range he generally shot the deer.

His reply: "I sneaks up ahint 'em about ten feet and shoots 'em tween the ears."

That guy didn't care much about ballistic tables.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old September 3, 2013, 10:00 AM   #24
Tom Matiska
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2000
Location: Wilkes-Barre, Pa
Posts: 1,013
irony: zombie thread about zombie cartridges.... cool.... both cartridges are 100+ years old, but like this thread refuse to die. Thanks to an extra 50-75 yards or so of useable range from FTX bullets both are less obsolete than ever. Trust either to work.... few million dead deer can't be wrong...
__________________
A gun is like a parachute... when you need one you usually need it pretty bad...
Tom Matiska is offline  
Old September 3, 2013, 10:26 AM   #25
chiefr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: AR
Posts: 1,296
A few inputs om the 35Rem:
Practically the only factory ammo you can find these days is the 200gr RNSP.
Reloading can allow for different bullets and bullet weights.

When reloading the 35Rem, you have to be careful seating the bullets because of the small shoulder like James K posted. It is easy to crush the case. I like to NSO this number whenever I can. Inside neck lubing is a big deal with 35 Rem.

Back in the teens thru the 30s Remington made the models 8/81 autoloaders and the slide action 14/141s. 35 Rem was the most popular round for these rifles. It would cost well over a grand to mfg these rifles today with all the machine work. They are works of art and among my favotite of the "Classics".

Today most associate the 35Rem with the Marlin 336.
chiefr is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13170 seconds with 8 queries