Winchester 94, good carbine poor rifle?

[jmorris]

If thats the case, wouldn’t you want to tote your most accurate and shootable rifle?

My accuracy and speed at any distance seems to be better with a scoped bolt gun

Just depends. I have some very accurate and shootable .22’s that I don’t use for some tasks.

I don’t think I have ever heard of anyone winning a 3 gun match with a bolt gun.

If you don’t like it for the task you have, just put it away. I’ll admit to not shooting my 94 in a decade at least. A number of others have killed deer and hogs with it though. If it works, it works, unless you just want to do something else and that’s fine too.

 

[d2wing]

There is hardly a better choice for sneaking through the woods. It is light and fast handling well balanced and easy to carry. The 30-30 round is a great choice for in the woods. Much better the pistol and cowboy cartridges. They have killed more deer than just about any other rifle in the past 120 years, I'd venture. When I use it I feel a bond with my Uncles That hunted from the 1920's until the late 1970's. I have a very old B&W photo from the 1930's or 40's of 3 of them by a meatpole with bucks on it in front a log cabin, with Winchester 30-30's and a Springfield 30-06. For my stand with longer precise shots like my Tikka 7-08. Both have served my very well. I should add that I was trained to be able to shoot a rifle like a shotgun at close range. The 30-30 is ideal for tracking if you have the skills. I fear as us old timers die off, hunting will be less a honed skill. I dread the sight of manufactured enclosed stands and shooting deer at feeders.

 

[jmr40]

I own about a dozen lever rifles, mostly in 30-30, and I like them. But realistically the round, and rifle were obsolete 4 years before being introduced. There are, and were better choices even in the 1890's. But I still hunt with them occasionally when I just want to make the hunt more challenging.

Despite the myth they are the HEAVIEST rifles made when comparing guns with equal barrel length and not especially easy to carry. And they are not any faster to get on target or, for repeat shots. We have seen all the cowboy movies and watched Lucas McCain work a lever action, but off the silver screen it doesn't work that way.

They have killed more deer than just about any other rifle in the past 120 years,

They've wounded more that were not recovered too.

While I like and enjoy shooting and hunting with my lever guns this is a much better carrying, hunting, and brush gun. Even with the scope it is a full pound lighter than my Marlin 30-30's and 3/4 lb lighter than my Winchesters. I can carry it easily with just one hand on the pistol grip though thick stuff much like I'd carry a pistol. The scope on 3X is great for low light situations and the ability to shoot tiny groups through baseball size openings in brush makes shots possible no one would attempt with a 30-30. It hits harder at 600 yards than a 30-30 does at 100 with about the same recoil. I can get off 3 shots in 2 seconds.





This photo was taken earlier this afternoon. I'd hiked about 3 miles into the north GA Mountains in the rain and I appreciated the light weight. You can see how thick the brush is. I had a shot at a small buck that I passed on today because it wasn't worth carrying one that small that far. It would have been possible with this rifle, not with my iron sighted 30-30.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

The 30-30 was killed a few deer as well as my biggest buck. However, its a pretty poor rifle for shots over 75 yards.

It may be a poor rifle for shots over 75 yards in your hands.
But the rifle is a fine deer rifle out to at least twice that distance in many folks'.

I'm not saying the .308 doesn't have advantages over it, but don't sell the .30-30 short.

I can’t really think of any situation deer hunting where I’d rather have iron or peep sights than a good 2-7 or 3-9 scope.

Hunting with hounds is one area where I think irons have the advantage, and we do that where I hunt.
It's not my favorite method, but if its a slow day and nothing is moving, I'll go try to get in on a race just to kill the boredom.

 

[roscoe]

I agree. Mine has a good Techsite peep, and with Leverevolution loads, is a solid 200 meter rifle. Beyond 250 you would really have to know your holdover.

 

[eastbank]

as a lefty growing up in the early 50,s and as not many left hand bolt action rifles were available to a poor farm boy, lever and pump rifles were the ticket for me and I have quite a few of both. I picked up this early Remington 141 pump in .35 rem at a very good price because of the non factory receiver sight(D&T on the side) and with my reloads of 200 gr RN bullets at 2000 fps sure kills deer very quickly with in its intended woods ranges.

 

[HB]

t may be a poor rifle for shots over 75 yards in your hands.
But the rifle is a fine deer rifle out to at least twice that distance in many folks'.

Mine wears a Williams peep. Off the bench I can keep them in a softball for 10 shots. Standing a paper plate is reasonable at 100. However I shoot a scoped 308 much better...

I like my 30-30 but I just can’t see taking it on a serious hunt anymore. I work too much and have too little time during rifle season to hamper myself.

I shoot revolvers much much more than I do semi auto’s but I can’t say with a straight face that a revolver is better for the vast majority of uses.

 

[Bfh_auto]

Mine wears a Williams peep. Off the bench I can keep them in a softball for 10 shots. Standing a paper plate is reasonable at 100. However I shoot a scoped 308 much better...

I like my 30-30 but I just can’t see taking it on a serious hunt anymore. I work too much and have too little time during rifle season to hamper myself.

I shoot revolvers much much more than I do semi auto’s but I can’t say with a straight face that a revolver is better for the vast majority of uses.

Get a BFR 30-30. Then you have both sides covered.
I find these threads to be entertaining. It's equally split between the the nostalgia crowd and the crowd that didn't need to learn to shoot with iron sights.

 

[HB]

I find these threads to be entertaining. It's equally split between the the nostalgia crowd and the crowd that didn't need to learn to shoot with iron sights.

For what its worth I went to the junior olympics for air rifle in my teens. Late 20s now. I don’t intend to come off as combative. I guess i just don’t get it. I dont really get the AR thing either so to each their own.

 

[Bfh_auto]

For what its worth I went to the junior olympics for air rifle in my teens. Late 20s now. I don’t intend to come off as combative. I guess i just don’t get it. I dont really get the AR thing either so to each their own.

I get it. With limited time, you try to make sure that you have the best chances.
I hated the 30-30 for a long time. Then my wife wanted one. After shooting it with hand loads I can respect it's abilities.
Now when I go hunting I take the 30-30 for the morning and a 240 wby for the evening when I can't risk a blood trail.

 

[ford8nr]

When I was younger I really enjoyed my 94 with iron sights. I also enjoyed shooting 4 position rimfire competition with irons. Now only somedays are good with irons. Everyday is a good day with a scope. Most aging rimfire competitors in our league have gone to scopes. Once in a while I still get one of my peep sighted rifles out, but my scores show it.

 

[someguy2800]

All I know is for where I hunt iron sights would be a severe handicap.

 

[Newtosavage]

My centerfire deer rifles are a 308 Zastava Mauser with a 3-9x40 Nikon and a 30-30 Winchester 1894 with a peep.

The 30-30 was killed a few deer as well as my biggest buck. However, its a pretty poor rifle for shots over 75 yards.

I hunted a logging road on public land this year. Doe down 20 mins into daylight at 125 yards because of the 308 with a Nikon scope. Then shot a buck an hour later at about 12 yards, 3x from 20’ high didnt handicap me.

Anybody else feel that leverguns are more for carrying than shooting?

I plan on getting dies for the 30-30 but so it can be a range gun with cast bullets. But for 7lbs of rifle I have much better options.

HB

I've carried the same pre-64 Winchester 94 since 1985. It happens to have an amazing trigger, which is very rare for a Winchester 94 in my experience, and I've shot a lot of them. It's also been a very accurate rifle - confirmed by the 3 or 4 times I put a scope on it, and shot well under 2" groups at 100 yards. It spent most of the first 15 years I owned it with a Weaver side mount and 4x Simmons scope. Killed a LOT of critters with that setup, including about 300 feral pigs and probably a dozen deer. I probably should have just left it that way, but I'm always tinkering so I figured I'd try other scope options. I scout scoped it with a 2X and that was just "okay." Then I tried different side mounts. then I tried different peep sights.

When it was my only hunting rifle, it made sense to scope it. Hunting rifles for 90% of practical shots, benefit greatly by being scoped. They gather light, help you see branches/grass in the way of the path of the bullet, help you see things behind the animal, and just plain help you see where you are aiming better. There are very few occasions where an open sight is an advantage over a low power scope. Very few. Most are for nostalgia's sake.

Having said that, my 94 is now wearing a rear peep sight and front fiber optic bead, and that's how it will stay. It's easy to shoot 3" groups at 100 yards with good light, and by using the bottom of the bead, I can keep it on paper at 200 yards when I need to. That's good enough for pigs, and that's what the rifle is dedicated to now - pig hunting. Lever actions are ideal hog guns, when you hunt them in the daylight in thick cover.

I had a couple 94AE's that I scoped in the conventional manner, but I never did like that solution. The stock on those just isn't set up for a scope. They really are best in their original configuration, with open sights. Most factory 30-30 ammo is pretty anemic anyway, barely charting over 2200 fps. over my chronograph. When you factor in the terrible BC of flat-nosed bullets, anything but LeverEvolution ammo really shouldn't be shot at a deer beyond 150 yards. So in that case, open sights should get the job done unless of course it's dim light and thick forest, etc.

I've come to terms with not trying to make my 94 something it isn't. It's still a ton of fun to shoot, and every time my son goes with me to the range, he asks me if we can take the 30-30. That will be his gun someday. He really enjoys shooting it, just as I have for the past 33 years.

 

[Newtosavage]

There is nothing more dangerous than a man who knows his rifle. If you are willing to take the time, a .30-30 with irons is all you need. If you are not, you're probably going to need something a little more fancy. I'll never forget pulling up my rifle on what was going to be my first buck... and realizing my scope was fogged up and wet, and I couldn't see anything out of it. Never got a shot off. I've never hunted deer with a scope since.

You needed a better scope.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Myself, I would not try to take a 94 in 30-30 on a deer hunt. Especially one that would involve longer ranges. However, I would act as spotter for a certain unnamed idiot that shall remain my brother with his lever action J.C.Higgins 30-30 that he was given for his 16th birthday and can use to make shots that border on miraculous. By the same token with my "92" Winnie in 32-20 a running rabbit @ 75 yards is going to change his name to dinner.

In all things, it's not the machine it's the operator. The unnamed idiot spends more time with that ancient rifle than he does his wife (just ask her.) After over 25 years of practice he has developed a keen understanding of what the tool can and cannot do and what conditions it "prefers" to work for him under.

 

[GAF]

Nothing wrong with the 30 30, but one can get a lever action in .22 all the way up to 450 Marlin, 30 06 , 300 win and more plus everything in between.

 

[Pat Riot]

Someone mentioned the 30-30 has wounded more deer that it has harvested. I would like to see the proof on that. I have seen and heard of more Nimrods with a scope that have taken shots that were, IMO, unethical, that may or may not have wounded the animal “that got away”.

This thread reminds me of the “Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge” discussions that have been quite entertaining over the years...

I would use my 30-30’s within their limitations. I have 2.
A Winchester 94AE carbine (with the dreaded cross bolt safety that makes them completely unusable and so hideous to look at that one would turn to stone if they stared too long at this aberration)
I also have a Marlin 336 that I recently de-scoped as having a scope on it made it weird for me. I could never get a mount that I liked.
The Winchester wears a set of XS sights - rear peep with the black and white blade front sight. Excellent sight for a 30-30 lever gun, in my opinion. I plan to put the same on the Marlin.

I love both my 30-30’s. I have not harvested an animal with either one but I know their capabilities and I know their limitations and I can hit a baseball at 150 yards with either of them, standing, prone or sitting.

 

[Karl.T]

My first "deer rifle" was on my 8th birthday, a brand new Winchester 94 in 30-30 that came from Wal Mart, that was 1973. Been using levers ever since in one form/caliber or another. For woods hunting I prefer open sights because shots are generally less than 60 yards and rarely exceed 100. For open terrain its a scoped Remington Model 7 .308.

What helped me become a proficient open sight hunter over the years is actually shooting my guns at varying distances and more than "to sight em in".

 

[cdb1]

The 30-30 was killed a few deer as well as my biggest buck. However, its a pretty poor rifle for shots over 75 yards.

.

My 336 with a VX-3 1.75-6x32 is good out to 200 yards on deer and hogs. So IMO you are wrong.

Anybody else feel that leverguns are more for carrying than shooting?

I don’t feel that way.

 

[cdb1]

People can denigrate the folks whose use scoped lever guns all they want, I don’t care. “If you’d just install a peep sight on your lever gun you wouldn’t need a scope”. I don’t buy that either. I’ve shot many a rifle with good quality peep sights(Lyman and Williams) and couldn’t shoot nearly as accurate as I do with a scope. I grew up up shooting iron sights and didn’t have a scoped rifle until I was in my early 20’s. I don’t own a rifle that’s not wearing a scope and doubt I ever will.

 

[Bfh_auto]

People can denigrate the folks whose use scoped lever guns all they want, I don’t care. “If you’d just install a peep sight on your lever gun you wouldn’t need a scope”. I don’t buy that either. I’ve shot many a rifle with good quality peep sights(Lyman and Williams) and couldn’t shoot nearly as accurate as I do with a scope. I grew up up shooting iron sights and didn’t have a scoped rifle until I was in my early 20’s. I don’t own a rifle that’s not wearing a scope and doubt I ever will.

I am terrible with peep sights. Buck horn with a blade front are better for me. My rifles that don't have scopes are 2 Krags and a Kentucky rifle. The 30-30 loses its scope on occasion.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Mine wears a Williams peep. Off the bench I can keep them in a softball for 10 shots. Standing a paper plate is reasonable at 100. However I shoot a scoped 308 much better...

I like my 30-30 but I just can’t see taking it on a serious hunt anymore. I work too much and have too little time during rifle season to hamper myself.

I shoot revolvers much much more than I do semi auto’s but I can’t say with a straight face that a revolver is better for the vast majority of uses.

There are certainly situations where a scoped .308 is a far better choice. I don't disagree with you at all on that point.
I'm just saying that there are situations where a gun with less range like a .30-30 is just as good a choice.
I have stands where you cannot see past 75 yards. We also hunt with dogs. In the first situation I believe its a wash. In the 2nd, iron sights are far better, at least for me. I've threw my Weatherby .30-06 to my shoulder on more than one occasion and pulled it down without firing a shot because I couldn't get a deer in the scope that was being pushed by dogs.

I am a bit nostalgic, but I also realize that an iron sighted, medium powered rifle has definite limitations. If I'm hunting a cutover from an elevated box stand, I'll have a more powerful rifle with a scope. No doubt.

 

[Newtosavage]

To anyone who says they can shoot "just as good" with open sights as they can a scope, I say prove it. I have 20/10 vision and have been shooting and hunting my whole life. Irons and scopes both. Putting a scope, even a 2x scope, on my Winchester always cut my group size in half. And that's not even the reason I use scopes for hunting. If I had full daylight and no shadows or brush/grass in the way every single time I took a shot at a critter, I'd use my open sighted 30-30 a LOT more. LOL

 

[ford8nr]

I know competitive rifle shooters that shoot irons as well as scopes at resonable distances but they aren't the norm. These are rifles with front and rear aperture sights with the sights costing as much as a decent scope. Back in my iron sight prime I could keep up with the scope shooters, not anymore. But again that's not the norm, I was shooting 200+ rds/week.

 

[ThomasT]

I like my peep sighted winchester 30-30 and intend to hunt with it this year just for fun. Where I hunt the shots are close and open sights work fine for me. Plus I have spent a lot of time shooting with open sights on air rifles just to keep in practice. I used to shoot a lot of squirrels and rats with open sights. I have killed more animals with open sights than scopes. And I have shot a scope sighted Marlin 30-30 out to 300 yards with a 3X scope. No problem shooting a couple of bowling balls to pieces with it.

And of all the deer and two elk I have shot, only one shot was over 80 yards. I did make one deer kill with a 243 at 250~ yards. But I normally hunt close and the open sighted guns I use work fine. And I like hunting with my side hammer caplock muzzle loaders. No scopes on those.

And scopes do have a place in the hunting field as mentioned. Better definition and the ability to see in low light. Nothing wrong with scopes.