I have hunted whitetails with both of these cartridges, using an AR-15 in TX, and a .30 Carbine Ruger Blackhawk (ok, so it was a handgun, not a rifle). Both perform well as long as I keep things within reason.

From a rifle, I suppose I would rather have a .30 Carbine than a .223rem. As much as I love the AR-15 platform and it pains me to say it, but I'm also a big believer in using "bigger bullets". Given the choice between 55grns and 110grns, I'd prefer 110, and given the choice between 30 and 22cal's, again I'd choose 30cal.

However, that's assuming I'm keeping my shots WELL within 100yrds, closer to 50yrds. I'd honestly give the .223rem a longer max range than the .30carbine, since the .30 carb sheds energy like a prom dress, but inside 50-70yrds, I'd give the .30carb the nod.

You are confusing the .44mag and the .357mag. The .30carb IS more powerful than a .357mag, but doesn't stand up against a .44mag. A .30 carbine DOES have as much energy at 100yrds as a .357mag has at 25yrds. A .30carb should be pushing 110grns at 1990fps, or 967ft.lbs muzzle, then has about 607ft.lbs. at 100yrds. The .357mag pushes a 158grn bullet @ 1450fps, 738ft.lbs. muzzle, 622 at 25yrds...

The .44mag actually has more energy at 100yrds than a .30carbine has at 50yrds (.44mag = 745 at 100yrds with a 240grn bullet, 1500fps muzzle velocity, .30carbine has 760ft.lbs. at 50yrds with a 110grn bullet with a 1990fps muzzle velocity).

Then combine this with the fact that the 110grn .30carb is only hitting 1990fps FROM A RIFLE, and a 240grn .44mag is pushing 1500fps with ease FROM A REVOLVER.

Yes, the .30carb outclasses the .357mag, but no, "it ain't no .44mag!"

B.S.!!!!!! LMAO!!! Where do you guys come up with this crap? The 30 carbine has 967ftlbs of energy at the muzzle and 373ftlbs at 200 yards versus the 44 mag. it has 1650 ftlbs at the muzzle and 661 ftlbs at 200 yards. There is no comparison! The 223 with a 64gr.sp has 1357 at the muzzle and 760 at 200 yards. both absolutely smoke the 30 carbine. Like I stated before the 30 carbine is absolutely useless as a hunting cartirdge.

Here is a link for the balistics charts incase you need to look for your self.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_ballistics_table.htm

I've killed deer with both in my younger days. The only positive I can say about the 30 caliber carbine is that a M1 carbine is very light to carry. End of list. Shooting deer with it was like poking holes in them with a 30 caliber sharpened stick. They died,..... eventually. 30 cal hole going in and virtually the same size going out. Very little, if any, expantion.

Lets be honest. The M1 carbine was originally concieved as a weapon to be issued to truck drivers and other rear echelon military personel. I guess they figured why waste a M1 Garand on a guy that wasn't going to be in frontline combat. But on the other hand they needed "something" a little more accurate than a handgun in case they had an encounter with the enemy. And that's about all it is too. A little more accurate than a handgun. With the standard military ball ammo they were using knock down power must have been feeble. Take my advice if you every get charged by anything large and dangerous (be it human or animal) and all you have in your hands is a 30 caliber caribine; aim for the head. It's your only hope.

Thank You! .30= crap, .223= crap +

Was Robert Ruark that said "Use enough gun"!

I ain't going to speculate on marginal calibers!

+ 1 for what Robert said then !!!

"right tool for the right job" IMO

I'll take the 30 carbine over the prarie dog gun for under 50 yards :s13:

The 30 cal carbine is exactly what it was designed to be. Something to replace the pistol in a desperate situation.

I like the 223, especially with the new bullets they are putting out in 22 caliber like the Barnes..