30/30 and elk ???
07-30-2013, 06:11 AM
#31
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
For those who think a 30-30 is marginal, or unethical. You've never shot an elk with one.
I have decades using a 30-30 on elk, and not one of them went out of sight when shot.
If the only way you can hunt is to glass all day, and take long shots. Then use your magnums like the magazines have brain washed you into believing you need.
A 30-30 is a powerhouse compared to a muzzleloader shooting a round ball, and they take plenty of elk every year.
I have decades using a 30-30 on elk, and not one of them went out of sight when shot.
If the only way you can hunt is to glass all day, and take long shots. Then use your magnums like the magazines have brain washed you into believing you need.
A 30-30 is a powerhouse compared to a muzzleloader shooting a round ball, and they take plenty of elk every year.
07-30-2013, 06:16 AM
#32
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
OP stated: "I guess mabey what I should do is have them both back out to shooting in a hunting situations. Off a bench is one thing but put him on sticks, shoot freehand some. All I know is that it is up to him and his father and at the end of the day it their elk hunt, I am just trying to help out."
***That is exactly what I would do in this situation because shooting off a bench, as several of us have now mentioned, isn't like in the field conditions a good share of the time. That is probably the biggest problem with people missing animals when they hunt out west. I don't know how many times I've seen guys taking standing shots at animals when there was plenty of time for them to go down to a sitting or kneeling position or even better to rest on a pack. tree, etc. to get a decent shot. If an animal is at any real distance it doesn't take much of a wiggle to miss, or even worse, wound the animal. I also couldn't agree more with all the comments in the previous post about the whiz bang big calibers that guys shackle themselves with when a 30-06 is all they need. Nope, they see Joe Hunter on the tube with a .338 and a fancy adjustable scope set to shoot 1000 yards and that's what they have to have to get er done. Then they can't tolerate the recoil and only shoot the thing 3 or 4 times, hit a pie plate at 100 yards on the range and call it good to go! If the boy can't practice properly under field conditions with the 30-06, then by all means let him shoot the 30-30 with a good bullet that has been mentioned in the thread and he'll just have to decrease the yardage on the hunt to what the 30-30 is capable of and as several have stated, that will be somewhat under 200 yards on an elk. Good luck and kudos for helping prepare the kid and his Dad for what should be a great hunt.
Pete---I'm not saying the 30-30 is marginal or unethical IF the shots are kept to a proper distance like you mentioned earlier. I use the term marginal when we're talking about distances increasing to the point where the energy doesn't come close to matching an 06! Your anology of the muzzleoader killing lots of elk doesn't surprise me. What really surprises me is that by now someone hasnt come on the thread and said that if an arrow can kill all those big animals, then why are you debating rifle calibers! It seems like that always happens in a thread discussing something like this. Obviously there is a big difference when an arrow is designed to bleed an animal out and there is a tracking job involved, while with a rifle there is also a lot of shock to the nervous system and a bigger wound channel that also enters into play with killing that animal quicker besides just the loss of blood.
***That is exactly what I would do in this situation because shooting off a bench, as several of us have now mentioned, isn't like in the field conditions a good share of the time. That is probably the biggest problem with people missing animals when they hunt out west. I don't know how many times I've seen guys taking standing shots at animals when there was plenty of time for them to go down to a sitting or kneeling position or even better to rest on a pack. tree, etc. to get a decent shot. If an animal is at any real distance it doesn't take much of a wiggle to miss, or even worse, wound the animal. I also couldn't agree more with all the comments in the previous post about the whiz bang big calibers that guys shackle themselves with when a 30-06 is all they need. Nope, they see Joe Hunter on the tube with a .338 and a fancy adjustable scope set to shoot 1000 yards and that's what they have to have to get er done. Then they can't tolerate the recoil and only shoot the thing 3 or 4 times, hit a pie plate at 100 yards on the range and call it good to go! If the boy can't practice properly under field conditions with the 30-06, then by all means let him shoot the 30-30 with a good bullet that has been mentioned in the thread and he'll just have to decrease the yardage on the hunt to what the 30-30 is capable of and as several have stated, that will be somewhat under 200 yards on an elk. Good luck and kudos for helping prepare the kid and his Dad for what should be a great hunt.
Pete---I'm not saying the 30-30 is marginal or unethical IF the shots are kept to a proper distance like you mentioned earlier. I use the term marginal when we're talking about distances increasing to the point where the energy doesn't come close to matching an 06! Your anology of the muzzleoader killing lots of elk doesn't surprise me. What really surprises me is that by now someone hasnt come on the thread and said that if an arrow can kill all those big animals, then why are you debating rifle calibers! It seems like that always happens in a thread discussing something like this. Obviously there is a big difference when an arrow is designed to bleed an animal out and there is a tracking job involved, while with a rifle there is also a lot of shock to the nervous system and a bigger wound channel that also enters into play with killing that animal quicker besides just the loss of blood.
Last edited by Topgun 3006; 07-30-2013 at 06:29 AM.
07-30-2013, 06:39 AM
#33
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
I understand an arrow kills differently than a bullet. I'd never say anything like that, and i'm surprised nobody has said it either.
However, if you hunt like a bow hunter. The 30-30 has way more than enough to kill an elk. I'm sure bow hunters snicker to read any caliber isn't enough to kill an elk.
Think of all the 44-40's that used to kill elk? Compared to a 30-30 it's a pea shooter.
If a hunter has to take long shots to get an elk. The 30-30 is not for them. I can only say that you don't have to take long shots. There are other options, and for those that choose those ways. the 30-30 is perfect, and you don't even need a scope.
Try it. You might love it.
However, if you hunt like a bow hunter. The 30-30 has way more than enough to kill an elk. I'm sure bow hunters snicker to read any caliber isn't enough to kill an elk.
Think of all the 44-40's that used to kill elk? Compared to a 30-30 it's a pea shooter.
If a hunter has to take long shots to get an elk. The 30-30 is not for them. I can only say that you don't have to take long shots. There are other options, and for those that choose those ways. the 30-30 is perfect, and you don't even need a scope.
Try it. You might love it.
07-30-2013, 07:12 AM
#34
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
Pete---It can't get any better than up close and personal with elk, especially with a bow during the rut or with what you hunt with! The longest shot I've ever taken was 311 yards on a good mulie and it was only because there was no way I could get closer with the wind and sun along with a complete lack of cover. I use my camera tripod for almost all my shooting and it sure came in handy that morning for a good solid rest that IMHO everyone should try to use as much as possible. Off hand shooting is to risky unless it's an awful close shot.
07-30-2013, 11:11 AM
#35
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
I feel mature mulies are much tougher hunting than elk. Mulies are smart, and won't let you get close. Young ones yes, but mature no.
As you know elk can be found in the timber, and during the rut are quite stupid. Not hard to get close at all.
As you know elk can be found in the timber, and during the rut are quite stupid. Not hard to get close at all.
07-31-2013, 04:06 PM
#36
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kittitas, Wa.
Posts: 462
I've never shot an elk in the timber or above 4,000ft for that matter, but I digress ...again if the kid can shoot the 30-30 with out sticks and other crutches let him shoot the 30-30 he's gonna be nervous as it is why make him have to worry about how to get some stupid set of sticks or a tripod set up to shoot off of...some times you only have seconds to make the shot offhand...I think some here haven't really done any real elk hunting and just want to try to show everyone how skookum they aren't..................... just my two cents worth, I don't know a whole heck of a lot but I go elk hunting every year and have been pretty much since 1963 with a shot time out to do some traveling courtesy Uncle Sam!!!
07-31-2013, 06:58 PM
#37
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
I think the lowest spot in Colorado is right by the Kansas border, and it's 3300ft.
I live at 8000ft, and the elk come down here in the winter. For ML season they're up at timberline at 11,000-11,500ft.
I live at 8000ft, and the elk come down here in the winter. For ML season they're up at timberline at 11,000-11,500ft.
08-01-2013, 04:17 AM
#38
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WY
Posts: 2,056
I think a predominant train of thought is to carry more gun than one probably needs. The problem with that is that there comes a point when there's so much gun that one can no longer handle it skillfully.
While the .30-30 wouldn't be my first choice for elk hunting today, there was a time when the only rifle in my possession was a .243, and it killed 3 elk (lost none, trailed none) before I added a .30-06. Under the right conditions, I can't recommend that the .30-30 won't kill an elk. Obviously, if your elk hunting depends on a 700-yard gun, the .30-30 isn't for you. I might suggest learning how to stalk - and it won't matter so much what your cartridge headstamp says.
While the .30-30 wouldn't be my first choice for elk hunting today, there was a time when the only rifle in my possession was a .243, and it killed 3 elk (lost none, trailed none) before I added a .30-06. Under the right conditions, I can't recommend that the .30-30 won't kill an elk. Obviously, if your elk hunting depends on a 700-yard gun, the .30-30 isn't for you. I might suggest learning how to stalk - and it won't matter so much what your cartridge headstamp says.
10-20-2013, 06:49 PM
#39
Spike
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1
For those who think a 30-30 is marginal, or unethical. You've never shot an elk with one.
I have decades using a 30-30 on elk, and not one of them went out of sight when shot.
If the only way you can hunt is to glass all day, and take long shots. Then use your magnums like the magazines have brain washed you into believing you need.
A 30-30 is a powerhouse compared to a muzzleloader shooting a round ball, and they take plenty of elk every year.
I have decades using a 30-30 on elk, and not one of them went out of sight when shot.
If the only way you can hunt is to glass all day, and take long shots. Then use your magnums like the magazines have brain washed you into believing you need.
A 30-30 is a powerhouse compared to a muzzleloader shooting a round ball, and they take plenty of elk every year.