30-30 vs. 44 mag

[Revolver Ocelot]

this is a continuation of the woods gun topic I started earlier, I am looking at getting a single action revolver and a lever action rifle for deer hunting/going out into the woods and was looking at either both in 44 magnum or a combo of 30-30 and 357

 

[LightningMan]

Sorry, I'd want the 30-30 rifle with a .44 mag. pistol, but thats just me. LM

 

[huntsman]

one's a rifle cartridge two are handgun cartridges, I'd take the rifle and a handgun choice.

 

[PT1911]

actually I would probably take the .357 mag rifle and .357 mag handgun.... but that is just me. So... with your given choices, I would likely choose the 30-30 and .357. gives more range, power, and versatility.

 

[Blue Brick]

+1 Rifle and Revolver chambered in 357 magnum, but I would use only heavy 38's, then again I live in Arizona.

 

[Blue Brick]

I have been looking at H&R heavily lately. They have a break-open carbine in 357 and 44 Magnum.

 

[harrygunner]

I thought about having a handgun and a rifle for the woods. I decided the two tools should provide different range capabilities. And at the same time, I wanted both to work close range.

So, I went with a 30-30 rifle and a .44 Mag revolver.

 

[kanook]

If you're going to reload go with a 35 rem and the 357 mag. When you star to cst your own you can resize to either one. Nothing like 200 grains of ww coming out of a 357 handgun. A lot of fun in the 35 also.

 

[BCRider]

If you're reloading then I'd go with the .44Mag option in both. Load up full power .44Mag for the lever rifle and something akin to .44Spl +P for the handgun if you find that the full on Mag loads are a bit much on the hand with the handgun.

I've got a .357 rifle for CAS events and while it may well be just fine for doing in deer when shooting a magnum round it FEELS like shooting a strong .22. To me this is a touch light.

Or go with the classic .30-30, which is a lovely round to shoot, and stick to handgun ammo in the handgun.

 

[Jim K]

IMHO, lugging around a rifle that is chambered for a pistol cartridge is like buying a big 4WD SUV with a Yugo engine. It might look impressive, but there ain't much there.

Sure, they did it in the old days, but that was back when more powerful rifles were big and heavy (and often single shot). When the .30-30 came along, the old timers thought heaven had arrived and they didn't waste a lot of time getting shuck of their .44-40 and .38-40 rifles in favor of more power and range.

Jim

 

[MCgunner]

I have a .357 magnum rifle and 3 handguns in the caliber. I like the .30-30, though, so that's what I checked. For woods bumming, .357 is all you need in a revolver and .30-30 is one of the better woods calibers for rifles extant.

IMHO, lugging around a rifle that is chambered for a pistol cartridge is like buying a big 4WD SUV with a Yugo engine. It might look impressive, but there ain't much there.

To 100 yards, the .357 will work. I shoot a 165 grain SWC at 1900 fps, can get 2000 fps from a 158 JHP. That'll kill any hog or deer to 100 yards. After all, the average .30-30 factory load 150 grain is doing good to hit 2200 fps. If you think it's stupid, fine, don't buy one, but I sorta like the combination of the magnum pistol bullet in the lever gun. The .454 Casull and .480 Ruger are chambered in the 92 Rossi, too. Tell me that doesn't have applications.

The .454 casull is not your grandma's .38-40. Neither is the .357 magnum, for that matter. What I like about the .357 beyond it's ability to kill big animals is that with a sight elevation change, I can shoot my 105 grain .38 SWCs at 900 fps and kill squirrel to 50 yards. It's 1.5" accurate at that range with that bullet and 4" at 100 yards accurate with the 165.

 

[tactikel]

How about a .444 Marlin and a .44 Mag. handgun? No? OK a .30-30 and the .357 would be my choice.

 

[Sunray]

You have a rifle. What's the handgun for?

 

[MCgunner]

Because I like handguns.

 

[jbkebert]

454 Casull and .480 Ruger are chambered in the 92 Rossi, too. Tell me that doesn't have applications.

I have been looking pretty hard at the .454 casull in the rossi 92. Put it together with my Freedom arms .454 SA and I'll be in heaven. I really think that combo would give the owner a great guide gun and side arm. I often hunt with a .44 mag handgun and it will flat nail a deer at 100 yards. Loaded right it will take a elk at 60 yards with a well placed shot. I am planning on trying a .357 mag blackhawk this year for deer but I don't have the faith in knock down that I have with the .44 mag. So my vote is for the .44 combo.

 

[hogshead]

I agree with lightning man 30-30 rifle and 44 rev

 

[dairycreek]

For a long, long time I hiked and hunted the woods of northwest Oregon with a Marlin 30-30 and a Ruger Blachawk in 44 magnum. Took a lot of deer with the 30-30 and actually used the 44 magnum to kill a large and angry black bear. I began to be interested in adding elk to my hunting agenda. Felt that the 30-30 was marginal for a large elk so I eventually went with 45-70, also in a Marlin. I have taken both elk and deer with the rifle and handgun (depending on the shot and situation) and have done quite well with that combination.

I would recommend a Marlin Guide gun in 45-70 and the Ruger Blackhawk in 44 magnum and IMHO you are pretty much well covered for a woods combo.

 

[AKElroy]

+1 to the .44 Blackhawk, but mine would have to accompany a mod 94 .30-30.

 

[chevyforlife21]

why do you need a handgun for deer huntin? defense from bears if thats the case id trust just a 30-30

 

[AKElroy]

He likes handguns.

 

[AStone]

Sorry, I'd want the 30-30 rifle with a .44 mag. pistol, but thats just me.

Ditto that, but I offer my opinion w/o apologies.

Actually, for most situations,
I'd want either a .30-30 carbine plus .22 revolver
or .22 carbine and .44 mag revolver.

 

[David E]

For deer hunting, it doesn't matter which. For general woods knocking, it makes more sense to have a .22 for one of the guns.

A .44 levergun has more versatility than a 30-30, altho I really think the old .30 WCF cartridge is under-rated today. (it doesn't have the words "magnum" or "belted" in the name and it's sooooooo old, after all.... )

that said, a .44 levergun makes a very good "Tactical Rifle" that can hide in plain sight. Holding 10 or more rounds of serious man thumper loads, yet having a benign "John Wayne" look shouldn't be overlooked. The same gun in 30-30 only gives up a little capacity and can fill that role admirably, as well.

 

[wheelgunslinger]

The 357 and the 30-30 is the best combo you've listed.
I carry a .357 in the woods here in black bear country. The 30-30's rep speaks for itself.

 

[SpotlightRanger]

If this is just for hunting than reloading does not really make sense when factory ammo is still so cheap.

I would get the .30-30 as it is a better round than the .44 mag for hunting and get a light double action .357 as a BU gun. This combo has worked for many; for many years.

 

[MCgunner]

For deer hunting, it doesn't matter which. For general woods knocking, it makes more sense to have a .22 for one of the guns.

Well, that's what I used to think, until I figured out that a good .357 with an accurate light .38 wadcutter could take small game just as well as can a .22. It was an epiphany. . My current woods bummin' .357 is a nickel Taurus 66. It can bench my wadcutter loads into an inch at 25 yards, good as any iron sighted .22. I have the sight elevation marked for magnum and .38 loads. Have the same set up, same accuracy with my 6.5" Blackhawk, but the Taurus is a good 10 ounces lighter on the hip.

I gotta admit, when I'm woods bumming I don't carry a rifle and when I'm hunting I rarely carry a handgun other than my concealed carry.