Hi
Please give me your opinion on this matter.
best regards
Danny

Inside 1oo yds the 44, over 100 I like the 30-30. If I had to Choose . The 30-30 with the 150 X bullet. PMC factory or hand load.

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree.....30/30 all the way. The .30/30 has a better BC and I think a better bullet selection (for rifle shooting). When a target might appear at anywhere from 15 yards to 150 yards, this is the best cartridge of the two. (and I do own both). I like the Winchester silver tip, hornady and sierra flat points, and cast my own bullets for this round...all 170 grainers. Good luck and good shooting.

I would also go with the 30-30.

I'm not so sure all that is right.

With a 170 a 3030 does, at the most 2200 fps. With a 150 probably, 2400. That's with a 20 inch lever gun.

A 44 mag, out of one of my 8.25s will give me a 200 grain bullet to over 1625 fps, a 240Gr to over 1500 fps with H110.

Adjust for barrel length and the mag is going to pick up some velocity. Seems damn close.

However, I have never owned a 44 Mag in anything but a handgun. So I can't personally swear to what it would do.

So, being a traditional guy, and knowing that the 30/30 works so damn well, I'd probably just grab that, if I had to make the choice presented, for close range deer hunting.

With a 44 mag out a of a carbine you should get around 1700 to 1800 fps with a 240gr bullet for 1500 to 1700 foot pounds. With a 3030 and a 150 you should get 2200 to 2300fps for 1600 to 1800 foot pounds numbers rounded. With the higher SD. of the 30 cal. you well end up with deeper penatation. I guess if it was one or the other I would have to go with the 3030. having shot deer with 3030 and pistol cal carbines. The 3030 has a edge.

I wouldn't choose either for hunting!

I started out hunting with a 30-30 my first couple of years...hated it. At anything much over "iron sight range" it was worthless. For actual "hunting" in thick brush it was no better than my handy little 7-08. Step into a 300 yd long clearing and you might as well be throwing rocks.

I do see many uses for a small, light, handy carbine with iron sights that would be tough as hell but handy enough to take with you anywhere.... Something that would "get the job done when the sheist hit the fan" in a non-hunting type situation (or as a backup if you drop your expensive "ultimate rifle" and shatter the scope or something, or if you're not the one with the tag but only along for the ride, etc...).

For that type of use the 44 wins (for me at least) hands down.

1) Ammo interchangable with my handgun.

2) It will hold more rounds in the tube.

3) If a big bear is angry at me, I'll take a 44 caliber 300 grain hard-cast over anything a 30-30 can spit out any day! Penetration of such a load is right up there with the big-bores, cutting a .429" hole along the way. Dead bear.

44Mag., 300gr. hardcast, I agree, dead bear.
I also agree that this combo has it all over the .30-30 in this situation but as many guys, present and past will tell you, the .30-30 certainly has it's place, just not for my use.

Thank God for Alaska, the Last Great Place!

I would go with the 30-30 and 150gr Firestar handload

30/30 will have it hands down over any 44 mag shooting factory ammo in a rifle. Now if you handload it may be a little different but not much I don't think. I've never shot anything other than targets but have run several hundred rounds (handloaded by me)through a Ruger 44 mag carbine and would still choose the 30/30 if I had to choose between the two. Not much room in that case to fit much more powder, if I remember right. Now for Cowboy Action Shooting it would be different, but then you would be looking at a different cartridge anyway, to be period.

I do remember my 30/30 kicking a lot more, of course the Ruger was an autoloader so that dampened it a little but to me recoil always tells you a little bit about how well something might perform under hunting conditions...

To make "BC" comparisons for the appropriate ranges of these cartridges is of no real value. The difference in bullet weight and frontal area render the .44 magnum far more effective on everthing from 250 pound Maine bucks to 400 black bear. Forget about perusing the ballistics charts, the .44 swats them hard and leaves exit holes the size of footballs. I've seen this time and time again over many years. If you've got a .44 Ruger carbine hold on to it.

I have shot a lot of game with both, and out to 75 yards the 44 kills much more emphatically and like someone else wrote on this forum leaves exit holes the size of footballs and often gives a good entrance wound as well. Past 100 yards the 30/30 shoots flatter. I own and shoot both but if I had to part with one it would be my 30/30. I have a very close relationship with my 1894 packer with 16 1/4 inch barrel. It is iron sighted and I can hit game out to 100 yards know drama. And when chasing stuff of the back of the ute it is dynamite.

From my experience it is the large frontal area same with the 45/70. On paper they don't look spectacular but within there useable range they kill better that long slender bullets.

Regards PC

------------------

44 hands down. If it is not enough, upgrade to the 444, both long gun and pistola. You could even upgrade to the 45-70 and still match chambers. Makes me want to go shooting!! Honestly, I used to hunt with my scoped 44 BH, armpit holster, while carrying a 10/22 scoped for rabbits and such. Looked funny, worked well.

------------------
Good Shooting!

I'd go with the .44 magnum, because the recoil and muzzle blast would be much more tolerable to my wife or kids.

I wouldn't choose either cartridge if I thought I'd need a 200 yard shot (my own shooting at the range from "field" positions is kind of iffy much beyond 200). For me, either cartridge is an excellent choice at 100 yards or less. That covers 80-90% of the shooting in the woods where I live.

H.C.

Remember, ballistics charts are useful, but do not give the whole picture. 1500 ft-lbs from a 30-30 is nowhere near as devestating as 1500 ft-lbs from a 44 or 45 cal. I have seen many deer hit with 30-30's that ran 100 yds or so. I have yet to see a deer hit with a 44 mag out of a rifle and go more than 100 feet. I'm not bad-mouthing the 30-30, I'm just voicing my opinion that with short range deer-thumpers, big and slow is better. As for me, I'm going to get a Win 94 in 480 Ruger and whack em harder than either the 30-30 or 44.

I think they are both good calibers, if used in the right application. My 30-30 has a reciever sight, it greatly improves iron-sight shooting. My ruger deerslayer 44 was shorter, make more noise, and seemed to kick harder, although neither is important in the field. It did have a shorter sight radius, I had a reciever sight ordered when some guy at work offered me more than I thought it was worth.
Good luck and good hunting