30-30 or 45/70

[solvability]

I have a 30-30 but want a 45-70 - would it do better - nope - I just want it - 45-70 though ranges in loads from mild to elephant - the 30-30 is all pretty mild but it sure gets the job done just fine.

I would get the 30-30 for sure if I did not want to handload - the 45-70 with handloads is not too expensive and lets you tailor the cartridge to the job at hand.

I saw a 300lb boar shot through the shoulders with the 45-70 - grapefruit sized exit. The 275 lb boar I shot with a 30-06 - quarter sized exit.

Internally the 30-06 did much more damage to the beast - but it is several 100 ft per sec faster than a 30-30.

All factors to weigh.

 

[wyocarp]

gunfighter123

I reload the 45/70 and get over 35 reloads per case , bought 500 Starline brass new and have not had a single one split/crack etc.

I agree that the reloads per individual case is high. But they do crack. I've just finished cleaning a bunch of various brass from this past fall and found two cracked hornady once fired factory load cases in 45-70. So, they do crack.

My only other problem is that any smaller brass likes to get into my big bore cases while cleaning.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The .30-30 is very good at doing what the .30-30 was designed to do -- kill deer-sized critters at reasonable hunting ranges. It's not ideal for elk, but with modern bullets and loads, it will work.

The .45-70 is mostly for nostalgia. There's nothing the .45-70 will do that a .30-06 won't do -- and the .30-06 would be my choice for elk in a factory rifle. (Although I like the 7mm Remington and the .300 Win Mag as well.)

 

[Kleanbore]

The .45-70 will out kill the .30-30 at ANY range.

If it his a vital area.

An therein lies the problem: the trajectory. Art Eatman described it by comparing it to a basketball.

There are reasons why the .50-70 was replaced by the .45-70, the .45-70 was replaced by the .30 Army, and the .30 Army and the initial .30 Government rimless with the round-nose bullet were replaced by the .30 Government (.30-'06) in military usage and in most big game hunting applications. One of the main reasons was effective hitting range.

That's also the main reason why the .30-30, .303 Savage, etc. replaced old black-powder cartridges.

So--depends on the range you need, and on how well you tolerate recoil.

If the .30-30 with Leverevolution ammunition doesn't cut it for you and you still want a Marlin lever rifle, there's the .308 Marlin Express, which is superior to either of the cartridges you mentioned, and the .338 Marlin Express, which ups the ante into the .30-'06 realm but which may be more than you need. Drawbacks are ammunition availability and cost.

The .45-70 has had a resurgence in popularity in recent years after having been moribund for many decades. Personally, I don't understand the appeal. The .348 Winchester stayed in production a lot longer, but it was handicapped by the rainbow trajectory that resulted from the flat bullet technology of the time--and for my taste, the heavy recoil. Lighter, pointed bullets at higher velocities are better except at short ranges.

 

[husker]

sounds like a coin flip to me. i need to go shoot the 45-70 so i can give my 2 cents worth. good thread guys

 

[Gewehr98]

Wyocarp, something doesn't smell right.

Those splits are exceptionally unusual for a .45-70. I'd have expected split case mouths from the 12th reloading, but those once-fired cases look like they were either sized too small, overpressure, or fired in an oversized chamber (or a combination of all three). I'd contact Hornady, ASAP.

Kleanbore, some of us care not one whit about rainbow trajectories or max point blank range. I've taken whitetail at 400+ yards with my Sharps BP loads. There's plenty of energy in a 535gr bullet at range, even at a leisurely 1200fps muzzle velocity. I knew the range to the deer, set the Creedmoor rear sight accordingly, and took the shot. No laser rangefinder, no 56mm objective, no overbore magnum - just like folks did back in the day. Leverguns don't have vernier sights, but there's no reason not to use something like my 1895G on edible game up to and including black bear - and I'd highly recommend the .45-70 levergun on the latter vs. a .30-30.

 

[Kleanbore]

I've taken whitetail at 400+ yards with my Sharps BP loads. There's plenty of energy in a 535gr bullet at range, even at a leisurely 1200fps muzzle velocity. I knew the range to the deer, set the Creedmoor rear sight accordingly, and took the shot.

Amazing shot!

How many people could do it? How many would want to try?

As I figure it you probably had to aim seventy or eighty inches high.(?)

By the way, what do you think the time of flight to have been?

Not for me, thanks.

 

[Gewehr98]

Who cares?

Really. We get wrapped around the axle over the darndest things.

I have a 3" tall rear sight on my Sharps, and it's good out to 1200 yards. 70" to 80" means nothing to me.

I know when I shoot buffalo silhouettes out to 1000 yards, I have time to look through my spotting scope and watch the incoming round smack the steel.

Time of flight to 400 yards is 1.15 seconds, with 236 inches of drop, according to the calculator. Time of flight to an 800 yard buffalo silhouette is 2.5 seconds, with 1079 inches of drop. Time of flight to 1000 yards is 3.25 seconds, with 1782 inches of drop. That's why there are such tall rear vernier sights on those rifles.

As to who does it? More than one would think at first, just go to Shiloh Sharps' website and view the customer trophy pics.

I wouldn't take the 400 yard whitetail shot if I wasn't comfortable with it. I'm not a total idiot - with that much hang time, if they were at a dead run, I'd wait for the next deer. What I'm trying to say is that we as hunters and shooters often get suckered into thinking we need a hot fast magnum with a laser-trajectory and huge light-sucker scope, when that's really not the case at all. If your skills allow you to go retro, then no harm, no foul.

I've filled my freezer using everything between a 6.5x53R to .45-70, and that includes my favorite laser beam 6.5-06, as well as the more sedate 7.62x39, .30-30, .30-06, .32 Remington, 8mm Mauser, and a whole bunch of others. If one is not comfortable with arched trajectories and longer times of flight, that's cool. Just don't say in a blanket statement that they shouldn't be used. That's not giving our shooting predecessors much credit at all, let alone the guy at deer camp who runs a Marlin 1895G.

 

[KBintheSLC]

For the stated purpose, I'd go with the 30-30. Its plenty powerful for what you need to do with it. The ammo is less expensive too. 45-70 is a beast of a round, well suited for bears, large moose, elk, etc at close ranges. For mid-sized game at longer ranges, the 30-30 will do the job just fine... and cheaper.

 

[sohcgt2]

30-30 is less expensive to feed.

 

[sprice]

30/30

less expensive, flatter trajectory, less recoil, more common to find, that is all.

 

[MT GUNNY]

I voted 30.30
Plus I have two other Words for ya,

"Lever Evolution" http://www.hornady.com/story.php?s=198

 

[CSA 357]

The 4570 , my handloaded 300 gr fnhp is death on a deer, i would load 350gr for elk ,3030 aint even in the ball park with these loads, i do like the 3030 its a great deer round! Csa

 

[Kleanbore]

Just don't say in a blanket statement that they [guns with arched trajectories and longer times of flight] shouldn't be used.

Never said anything of the sort. However, I wouldn't recommend them for most people, particularly those who would ask the OP's question.

You skill is obviously much, much higher than average.

That's not giving our shooting predecessors much credit at all....

Our shooting predecessors used guns like that because they were the best available at the time, and they changed to guns that better met their needs as they became available.

Sharps didn't go out of business, and Remington Rolling Block and the Winchester 1886 and Model 71 (and 1892, for that matter) didn't go out of production, because our shooting predecessors "got suckered"--they lost popularity with those people with the advent of smokeless powder, because they could buy guns that they could use more effectively. The same thing had happened with muzzle loading rifles, and it happened with smooth bore hunting weapons before that. I won't take any credit at all from those who carried Hawken rifles into the Rockies, but it's likely that any Hawken user who lived long enough ended up carrying a breachloader.

That's not to say they should not be used by those who can and want to do so.

If you enjoy using them and can do so, great, but I think you would agree that the neophyte hunter would be better served by something that does not require accurate range estimation, trajectory calculation, sight adjustments at the time of the shot, and holding very high over the target.

 

[High Planes Drifter]

I said .30-30.

Aside from the previously mentioned reasons; a .30-30 Marlin, or Winchester is a gun you can hand to a youngster to hunt with, whereas a .45-70 would probably dish out too much recoil for a tennager, or preteen.

 

[fireman 9731]

Yikes Wyocarp

For factory ammo to do that something has to be way wrong....

I have loaded my 45-70 rounds to well over Hornady factory pressures with nary even a bulge!

I would be sure to get that gun checked out!

 

[wyocarp]

I did contact Hornady and forwarded them the pictures. They responded in a very casual way and just said the metal was probably too hard (one sentence), end of story. I expected a little more from them, but Hornady didn't seem a bit surprised or worried.

 

[wyocarp]

I am absolutely shocked that so many are voting for the 30-30 over the 45-70. The only thing I can figure is that there are more people with the 30-30 rifles and they are probably in areas where game is smaller.

(That ought to raise some feathers.)

 

[Harve Curry]

I like the 45-70 and 1500-1600fps muzzle velocities are comfortable to shoot. It's accurate and I can compensate for trajectory out to 200 yards with iron sights on game.

 

[mavracer]

to all the people who are touting the 30/30s trajectory advantage.you do realize a 45/70 shoots flat enough to well out past where a 30/30 runs out of energy.ya sure it's probably easier to hit a deer at 300 yards with a 30/30 but does it have enough energy to reliably kill it humanly

 

[Kleanbore]

to all the people who are touting the 30/30s trajectory advantage.you do realize a 45/70 shoots flat enough to well out past where a 30/30 runs out of energy.ya sure it's probably easier to hit a deer at 300 yards with a 30/30 but does it have enough energy to reliably kill it humanly

That's a very good question. The .30-30 was in the old days considered a rather short range proposition due to the flat nose bullets. I'm not sure what the answer is with the Lever Evolution loads, but that is why I suggested the possibility of the .308 Marlin Express.

For many decades bolt rifles have been preferred by many over lever guns. The Savage an Browning lever guns provided alternatives, and I think the Hornady approach opens up new possibilities for Marlins.

Teddy Roosevelt liked the 1876 Winchester, but later in Africa he used an 1895 in .405 and a .30 Springfield (pre- '06, I believe). When I read a recent field review of the .338 Marlin express, my immediate thought was about how TR would have liked it.

 

[wyocarp]

ya sure it's probably easier to hit a deer at 300 yards with a 30/30 but does it have enough energy to reliably kill it humanly

I would think that if one is considering shots out to 300 yards and beyond, then it would be time to start thinking about something other than these two guns.

 

[mavracer]

That's a very good question. The .30-30 was in the old days considered a rather short range proposition due to the flat nose bullets. I'm not sure what the answer is with the Lever Evolution loads, but that is why I suggested the possibility of the .308 Marlin Express.

THEY MAKE LEVEREVOLUTION IN 45/70 TOO

I would think that if one is considering shots out to 300 yards and beyond, then it would be time to start thinking about something other than these two guns.

that was precicely my point:banghead:although as Gewehr98 has said with a little "kentucky windage" the 45/70 is more than capable of 300+

 

[Kleanbore]

I would think that if one is considering shots out to 300 yards and beyond, then it would be time to start thinking about something other than these two guns.

Yep!

For those who insist on the nostalgia, the Marlin .308 and .338 might well do the trick, from what i've heard.

Not that a good bolt gun wouldn't be a little more accurate, and more convenient to unload.

Years ago, I fired a Winchester Model 1886 in .45-90 on a range at 300 yards. I did hit pretty well after getting the zero. It would not be my choice for game that could be any way from 50 yards to 300 yards away.

Nor would I choose iron sights for 300 yard shots on game.

 

[batmann]

I think the .30-30 would serve you well. I like the .45-70, but it can me a little hard on the shoulder at times. The new Leverevolution ammo gives the the .30-30 extra range and a bit more pop on something like an Elk.