+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: .30-30 vs. .35



  1. #1
    Wrangler
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Northern Taxifornia
    Posts
    318
    Member #
    2654
    Thanked
    1 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    I hope our site admin, GunJunkie, will direct me to the right place if this topic has already been beat to death.

    What prompted me was reading several very interesting posts here about folks waiting for the new 336 XLR to come out in .35 Rem.

    On Chuck Hawks' subscriber section of his website, he has a comparison report of these two cartridges in lever guns (as many of you know, he is a big lever gun fan and hunter). This comparison is pretty factual with a lot of measured data.

    The bottom line according to Hawks' research is that the .30-30 is superior to the .35 in virtually every respect except when using a 200 grain round in .35 at close range on a large animal. Every other measurement of killing power, energy, velocity, trajectory, you name it, etc. at any range shows the .30-30 to be superior, whether 150 or 170 grains. This was not focusing on the new LE round, which would probably widen the gap.

    Any thoughts or comments from our experienced shooters, since I don't own either yet but am lusting after a 336 XLR in .30-30? :?
    "Government is not the solution to the problem; government is the problem." Ronald Reagan.

    GOA/NRA Life Member, USN Veteran

    Marlin 336 XLR

  2. #2
    Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    State College, Pa
    Posts
    24,995
    Member #
    12
    Thanked
    422 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    Lots have discussed it, but its not a real sticky thing.. some prefer the heavier bullets the 35 uses for Black Bear.. but both will do a great job on the ones east of the Mississippi .. To me there is not enough real world difference between the two .. so its all personal preference as to what you like.. some like the availabilty of the 30-30 ammo better.. the recoil is little milder I would guess. ( never shot a 35 much). I think with the new ammo from hornady the 30-30 has benefited the most from it.. but neither is a bad choice for rifle.. If I was rich I probably would have one of everything Marlin makes.. :lol:

    Ballistic wise. the 30-30, 35 Rem, and 32 special are all fantastic rifles.
    Gunjunkie..

    "Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness." --George Washington

  3. #3
    Wrangler
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Michigan up-north
    Posts
    261
    Member #
    1654
    Thanked
    36 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    What is left out is the 35 is 16% larger in dia and is heavier for more penitration when required. So if you understand that more tissue distruction is better than less tissue distruction you start to see why the 35 has more on game performance (wider & deeper wounds). And when you reload to 2200fps the 200gr numbers are greater then the 170gr numbers at an actual muzzel velocity of about 2200fps. Both are great for deer but on game larger than deer the 35 shines.
    For on game performance the 35 whelen will out do the 30-06, the 358win will out do the 308win, and the 35rem will out do the 30-30win. But all the 30cals will shoot flatter than the compared 358cals just like the 270 win will shoot flatter than the 06 will. Sometimes flatter is better!
    Remember velocity is mainly for trajectory with a 1X bearing on momentum which equals penitration which equals on game performance the energy values by their selves are almost but not meaningless.

  4. #4
    Deadeye
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Hancock Co., Indiana
    Posts
    544
    Member #
    899
    Thanked
    18 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    Do you have a link to the chuck hawks article? I'd like to read it.

    I don't know what the article says but I suspect he's comparing factory loads. I think the .35 Remington starts to gain the advantage when it shoots handloads. There's a big difference between what you in a box at K-Mart and what you can do with your handloads or even from a custom ammo maker like Buffalo Bore. Did the chuck hawks article consider all the paper ballistics information considering a 220 grain bullet at 2200 fps? That could make a significant difference. Even the new LeverEvolution probably helps make the .35 Remington compare a little better than it did at the time the article was written.

    I guess they are both good cartridges and very capable. They are probably more alike than they are different but each is bound to have it's advantages in one way or another. Personally, I just like the idea of being able to shoot a bigger, heavier bullet. That's more important to me than a few inches of trajectory or a few pounds of energy out at 150 yards.
    ww.indianapredatorcentral.com


    "...it is the man behind the gun that makes the difference. An inch or two in trajectory or a second or two in rapidity of fire is as nothing compared to sureness of eye and steadiness of hand." -- Teddy Roosevelt

  5. #5
    Wrangler
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Northern Taxifornia
    Posts
    318
    Member #
    2654
    Thanked
    1 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    This link will take you to Chuck Hawks' site. However, to see the article in question, you have to go to the Member Side, then to Rifle Cartridges, and then the comparison section, where there are many useful articles. I think a 30 trial membership runs about $4.95 if I remember correctly. I started that way and now have a quarterly membership. Worth every penny. No advertising. The non-Member side, which you'll also see on this link, is free and has a lot of good articles, but not the one I'm referencing.

    http://www.chuckhawks.com/index2.guns.htm

    The differences between the two cartridges are more than just a few fps or ft/lbs here and there. Responding to a question, yes he compares only factory loads, but does mention that a lot of folks cook up handloads for the .35 rem. The specific factory loads compared are the Remington Core-Lokt in 150 and 170 gr. for the .30-30; and the same in 150 and 200 gr. for the .35 rem. He wanted to eliminate possible differences due to different manufacturers or bullets.
    "Government is not the solution to the problem; government is the problem." Ronald Reagan.

    GOA/NRA Life Member, USN Veteran

    Marlin 336 XLR

  6. #6
    Army Veteran 67-69 Korea Administrator
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Howard City, Mich
    Posts
    20,001
    Member #
    178
    Thanked
    10064 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    One other thing Navy, is the .35 has a different range when it comes to bullets that is not often discussed. I can use pistol bullets very effectively, the .38 - .357 mag line of pistol bullets do work well in the .35 rem. Given they do run from 110gn on up, and you could get some lighter. So either cal can be used for a larger range of targets and game. I own both and would not really give one an advantage over the other for pratical shooting, in ballistics the 30-30 is the winner easily. I have loaded 180, 200 and 220s in the 30-30. AFTER THOUGHT before anyone wonders about the OAL with heavier bullets and the placement of the crimp on the bullet, I had to trim the cases undersized (30-30 the long necks of cases). The 180s were no problem. I done this for some bear hunters.
    God Bless Our Troops -- Retired Tool & Die Maker -- The center of an Aspirin is the same size as the center of the moon, aim for the center.

  7. #7
    Sidewinder
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Foothills of the Adirondack Mountains
    Posts
    136
    Member #
    432

    .30-30 vs. .35

    Go Navy:

    As gunjunkie mentioned most differences are subtle in nature, i.e. recoil, muzzle blast, .etc. And as he stated the 30-30 would have an edge with a flatter trajectory. Both kill very well, especially with a shooter/hunter who is cognizant of his rifle's ability. I wouldn't be afraid to use either on deer including big whitetails, black bear, elk and moose. With that said, I'm comfortable with a .35 and that is my choice for most of my hunting that I do here in the northeast. I've taken lots of deer with both and black bear over 300 lbs with my .35 Rem. I'm going to use my .35 on moose when I get a chance and would readily use it on other larger deer. Doing this with handloads or hotter commercial ammo such as Buffalo Bore or LeverEvolution.

    I've handloaded for my 30 30's with very good results and will do so for my .35 as well. The .35 will definitely be improved with handloading and really shines according to what I've seen, heard and read.

    Personally I've found no need for the LE or Buffalo Bores and for now I'm quite satisfied with factory Federal, Winchester and Remington ammo.
    Incidently, a friend I nurtured in big game hunting took at least 11 black bears with his 30-30 with some of them going over 400 lbs live weight. Only once did he have to shoot one multiple times (more than twice) and he will readily admit that was his fault. All being taken with 170 gr. Remington Corelokt and Winchester Power Points.

    The .35 in my opinion puts the deer down quicker and leaves a better blood trail because of it's larger diameter as TJEN mentioned. But for me, well, I'd feel appropriately armed for the game I mentioned out to 200 yards + for the whitetails and 125 yards + for the rest with either caliber. Just my opinion.

    In any event good shooting and let us know what you decided.

    Range Finder
    THE .35 REM WAS GOOD ENOUGH IN 1906 AND IT'S GOOD ENOUGH NOW!

  8. #8
    Sidewinder
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    195
    Member #
    1506

    .30-30 vs. .35

    I was debating between the 30-30 Winchester and the 35 Remington. I did some research, ran some numbers, and came up with something similar to what Mr. Hawks concluded. The 30-30 is a little bit better than the 35 Remington.

    Please put some emphases on a “little bit better”. The 30-30 has a little bit more energy and is flatter shooting. As some point out the 35 Remington will punch a larger hole and it weighs more. Really for me they are both in the same class. Only reason I choice the 30-30 over the 35 was the availability of ammo.

  9. #9
    Wrangler
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    West Georgia, USA
    Posts
    365
    Member #
    194
    Thanked
    99 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    Having owned both and shot a lot of deer and other game with both, I can attest to the fact that the .35 shines a little bit brighter than the .30wcf when used on game.

    I doubt seriously that the .35 with a 200gr bullet penetrates more however. I have never retrieved a 170gr bullet fired from a .30wcf from a game animal. In fact, my biggest complaint against the .30wcf is the poor performance I've gotten from the 170gr bullets due to lack of expansion. I have retrieved .35 bullets from deer shot "length wise", and penetration is still almost complete. Bullet expansion is more reliable from the .35 in my experience because of the greater inital frontal diameter given a similar construction. My best results from the .30 has been with the more blount bullets, including cast bullets at jacketed bullet velocities.

    The "slap" from the impact of a .35 is greater than with the .30, and speed of bleed out is greater due to larger entry AND exit wounds. Again, no real suprise.

    But, with the closest thing I have to compare is a .30wcf loaded with a 150gr Corlokt to 2,390fps and a 35Rem loaded with a 200gr Rem Corlokt to 2,250fps.
    The paper numbers favor the .30, but there is a small but perceptable advantage to the .35 in the "real world" where deer are actually shot.

    The deer can't/don't read, nor do they count very well.
    They are only impressed with actual on target performance.

    If "paper data" alone told the whole story, neither of the cartridges would be with us still.
    However, the real story is that both do what they were originally intended to do VERY WELL even after over a century since they were released. Only the .35 does it a little bit better.
    In GOD we trust: all others are "suspects"!

  10. #10
    Contributing Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Posts
    3,609
    Member #
    1624
    Thanked
    1308 times

    .30-30 vs. .35

    Quote Originally Posted by Range Finder
    I've handloaded for my 30 30's with very good results and will do so for my .35 as well. The .35 will definitely be improved with handloading and really shines according to what I've seen, heard and read.
    If you look at the reloading manuals (all of them I think), they will tell you that the .35 shines a bit brighter when reloaded. I also like the fact that you can use .357 mag/38 special bullets for plinking.

    However, the availability of ammo and used rifles makes the 30-30 very attractive. And if you were to base your decision on number of deer killed, the 30-30 would beat all other rifles regardless of caliber or action type. It's hard to go wrong with either gun. :lol:


Home | Forum | Active Topics | What's New | Subscribed Threads

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search tags for this page

30 30 chuck hawks
,

30-30 chuck hawks

,
32 remington chuck hawks
,
35 rem chuck hawks
,

35 remington chuck hawks

,
chuck hawks .30-30
,
chuck hawks .35 remington
,
chuck hawks 30 30
,

chuck hawks 30-30

,

chuck hawks 35 remington

,
chuck hawks killing power
,
chuck hawks on the 35 remington
,
chuck hawks vs. .30-30
Click on a term to search for related topics.