Usefullness of 30-30 in "Modern Combat"

Status
Not open for further replies.
My 30-30 is not even among the guns that I keep "ready to go" in case of some home invastion situation.

I live a bit out in the country in a "semi urban" setting (houses within 50-60 yards from me) and I feel that my Marlin 336 is too powerful and too risky (overpenetration and range) to use in such environment.
 
If all I had was a 30-30, it would certainly be better than nothing... But, seeing how I don't think any gun safe/cabinet/locker is complete without one... I have one, and love it. It's more than a capable round, it's got plenty of punch, can be fairly accurate, and ammo available at just about every place that sell ammo... For sniper duty?? I'd rather have my 7mm-08 bolt... But the 30-30 would suffice for most application one might have...
 
Didn't Col. Jeff Cooper regard the .30-30 levergun as an ideal rifle?

Or am I confused as to who it was?
 
I would say that a good man who grew up deer hunting with a lever action 30-30 will put a hole in your hat from point blank range to the far side of 200 yards quicker than you can spit your bubble gum juice. As long as he has a pocket full of ammo I'd stay behind cover.
I now some guys who could hold there own in an uban combat situation. So to anwer your question, I think think it's not to bad. It is a killer.
 
Great all aroind rifle and round. Feel well defended with a lever action 30-30.
 
A good heavy .30 cal round will definitely do well in an urban setting. Should have decent barrier penetration and surely will drop a bad guy.

Now in a more open country setting is where its disadvantaged. I have never owned a 30-30, but I hear its not the best long range round.
 
As a combat rifle the 30-30 comes up short for overall use. As a self defense or "Scout" rifle you could do a lot worse. I would rather have a Marlin set up as a scout rifle than an SKS.

Cooper did recommend the lever action 30-30 as an option for a scout rifle.
 
I would say that a good man who grew up deer hunting with a lever action 30-30 will put a hole in your hat from point blank range to the far side of 200 yards quicker than you can spit your bubble gum juice. As long as he has a pocket full of ammo I'd stay behind cover.
I now some guys who could hold there own in an uban combat situation. So to anwer your question, I think think it's not to bad. It is a killer.
Perhaps, but 200 yards is very impressive for a pistol. It is not at all impressive for a rifle. In fact, 200 yards is not combat effective for a rifle.

I would rather have a 30-30 than a pointy stick, but when it comes to rifles, I would take nearly anything else.

30-30 is a great deer round. It's a great round for shooting anything that is not too far away. It is not a great combat rifle.
 
Didn't Col. Jeff Cooper regard the .30-30 levergun as an ideal rifle?

Here's a couple of quotes by Jeff Cooper that I've posted before here on THR:

The new "weapon of the masses" seems to be the Chinese version of the Kalashnikov. It is not very accurate, nor very powerful, nor very well made - but it is cheap, and this matters very considerably. It is not as good a weapon technically or tactically as a Winchester or Marlin lever action 30-30, but it is a self-loader, and that makes a great difference to a lot of moderns who feel that they must have semi-automatic fire in order to "keep up."
Note that Mike Root, our man in Cuchillo, cleaned up the iron sight category at the last Keneyathlon with his 30-30. I do not think anyone is likely to do that with an AK47, or clone thereof.

This is the centennial of the great Model 94 Winchester, one of the outstanding artifacts of modern times. It is unsound to make the claim that any one instrument "won the West," but the 94 was the mainstay of the wilderness during the early years of the twentieth century, and in the days of my youth it was a rare household that did not contain one. This excellent weapon is still with us today, and rendering good service wherever it is found. It you do not own one, you should get one, and not only for the sake of sentiment. If the public scene turns nasty, as some say it may, you will be far better off with an M94 in 30-30 than you will be with an SKS, AK47, or an M16.

I think it's clear he's not talking here about military combat but about a general purpose rifle during a time of social upheaval (I read once that if he was outfitting his own private army his rifle of choice would be the Springfield SOCOM).
 
Perhaps, but 200 yards is very impressive for a pistol. It is not at all impressive for a rifle. In fact, 200 yards is not combat effective for a rifle.

In terms of combat, probably this is true. In terms of realistic self-defense, I don't know that I could disagree more with you. I can't think of many scenarios that are even remotely likely to happen to the average guy where shots past 200 yards (or, for that matter, up to 200 yards) would be called for. I suppose if your worried about counter-sniping, which I am not in the least concerned about, maybe.

200 feet is probably the more likely maximum range you will need to concern yourself with...
 
I remember reading Jeff Cooper found merit in the Win 94 and a long eye relief forward mounted scope for a Scout Rifle, still maintaining the iron sights. Mike Root is fond of large arpeture sights and ghost ring sights.
 
Is it an ideal "combat" rifle, of course not, but it is ballistically relevant and in the hands of a competent rifleman, could create chaos in the ranks of the enemy.
The naysayers most likely have never handled a Winchester 94 carbine. The light weight, balance and ease of handling needs to be felt to be appreciated. Those are the reasons that lever action remained the favorite of many for a 100 years.


NCsmitty
 
As a Military round-probably not
A lever action as a Military rifle-NO
The round has a rim which makes feeding from a mag difficult and the action itself has limitations.
As a personal survival rifle -- why not. Rifles are reasonable, ammo cheap and the chances of the average person being in a true 'combat' situation is pretty slim.
 
In fact, 200 yards is not combat effective for a rifle.

Wasn't ONE of the reasons they came out with the 5.56 because they had found during WWII most combat had been at ranges of under 200 yards.

You don't have to use RN bullets. Any of you guys ever heard of Lever Revolution ammo? It's been out for a long time now.

As far as home defense my .30-30 is what I would grab instead of my shotgun or bolt action rifles because it's light, handles fast and will penetrate all but the heaviest body armor.
 
The modern .30-30 is called 7.62x39. Tube fed lever guns are way too flimsy for combat, too easy to dent a magazine tube or break something on and render it useless or nearly so. Range is limited by bullet ogive/BC, too. The Germans re-designed the 8x57J to the 8x57S and used the spitzer to increase effective range of the round. They could do that with a box magazine rifle. Leverlution would have to conform to FMJ specs to be acceptable for service use, no expansion allowed, and penetration of armor is a desirable trait in a service round.

.30-30 lever guns will forever be deer rifles.
 
I believe that if there were a situation where all members of my neighborhood had to form a militia, there would be quite a few with the model 94 as their primary weapon.


They have been a very popular gun for a long time, I know people who do not participate in the shooting sports that have one in the closet.
 
The late, lamented Jim Cirillo with a pair of S&W Model 10's could have wreaked havoc on a fire-team of gangbangers armed with Mac-10's and black rifles.

I shudder to think what he could accomplish with a .30-30 lever-gun...
That's for sure. And, a great way to sum up how I feel about it.

Most guys can't shoot for anything past 200 yards unless they're on a rest with a bolt gun.
And, in the adrenaline rush of modern combat, you'd be lucky to hand pick a squad of guys who aren't in the military to be able to accurately fire a weapon at 200m targets from the same town.

Conversely, a guy who can shoot and keep his head and is armed with a 30-30 is a bigger threat than a spray and pray billy-bob with an EBR.

It's always about the user.

Would I use it as a "modern combat" weapon? Depends on what the mission is and who I'm fighting.
It would certainly be at the bottom of my list, but if I had to use one I wouldn't mope about it.
 
I don't own one, but if I HAD to go to battle, I'd want an M14. I know it's heavy. I know its ammo is heavy. But, it's an effective rifle way out there and when I'm behind cover and have a good rest, I ain't your average grunt you guys keep talking about. I can hit past 300 yards. Main thing is, it's a rugged battle rifle. Now, I suppose it'd depend on terrain. Jungle fighting or house clearing in urban combat are not the M14's best application.
 
I have a Marlin 336 with a 3-9x var scope... It's part of my contingency plan. I can shoot accurate enough with it up to 250+yds, and I figure I'll personally probably never have to take a SD shot longer than that anyway... If I do, there's other things I'd be setting up on the perimeter to prevent that necessity.

As an infantry rifle? No, the .30-30 is not ideal, but "It gets the job done" for most things.
 
Ballistically, it's the equal of the AK that so many around here think is the ultimate fighting carbine.

It's reliable. It is a repeater.

Tedious reloading is its primary weakness (mitigated a bit by its ability to be "topped off" at will).

Otherwise, it's got potential.:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top