logo
 

Sponsored by:
Go Back   HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Guns

Guns Like firearms themselves, there"ôs a wide variety of opinions on what"ôs the best gun.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-06-2011, 12:27 PM   #11
Super Moderator
 
Bocajnala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Indiana, PA
Posts: 5,490
Send a message via AIM to Bocajnala Send a message via Yahoo to Bocajnala
Default

If I had to choose one of these I suppose it'd be the .270 because it gives me more options in the future. But, I love carrying my 336. The last two seasons I haven't even touched my .30-06 because I like carrying the .30-30 so much. The .270 will give you a little more range probably. And be a better option for some future hunts. But for just hunting whitetails and normal ranges the Marlin is hard to beat. Mine will also shoot 1" groups at 100 yards which I was very impressed with. I had always heard that levers weren't as accurate as bolt action rifles. And that may be true, but a 1" group at 100 yards is nothing to complain about.
-Jake
__________________
If you know how many guns you own, you probably don't own enough!
In God We Trust
#97,826
Bocajnala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 03:08 PM   #12
Nontypical Buck
 
VAhuntr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 3,116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gangly View Post
Branches and brush are two different things. Obviously a the minor differences in size don't allow either of the bullets to penetrate through branches with any noticable difference in the results of the two, but small twigs yes. Both bullets carry varying amounts of momentum and are thus deflected, or have a resulting change in motion, dependant upon that momentum. Two equal size twigs with identical inertia will affect the two bullets differently. Yes, if you put a branch 10 feet in front of you and 90 feet from the target, neither bullet will likely hit the target. However, if you put the branch 10 feet from the target and 90 feet from you, the bullet with more momentum will be less affected by the inertia of the branch and thats a fact. The resulting trajectory wil differ for both bullets, but more-so for the lighter bullet and therefore the heavier bullet is preferred.

Regardless of what your beliefs are, for close range a "heavier" bullet is better, especially if there is the off chance that your bullet might go through some unexpectied foilage along its path before getting to its target.

On a side note, I would never condone shooting through brush, regardless of the circumstances, but sometimes you are shooting at a moving target and its going to happen unexpectedly. Heavier bullets are the easiest way to minimalize the affect or items in the bullets path at close distances.
If I remember correctly the momentum of a bullet is figured by multiplying bullet weight times bullet velocity.

A 130 grain bullet fired from a 270 Winchester has more momentum than the 150 grain or 170 grain bullet from the 30-30. The 140 grain and 150 grain 270 bullets have more momentum as well.

I used to hunt with a 30-30 and have taken some deer with it but I would much rather have a 270.

Another option you could consider would be the 308 Winchester.
__________________
"Never stand and take a charge...charge them too."

--- General Nathan Bedford Forrest, CSA
VAhuntr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 03:44 PM   #13
Typical Buck
 
Sfury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 970
Default

Well, seeing as the guys on the Gun Nuts show just did a an episode on shooting through brush, I can honestly say that the evidence was quite clear.

No round shoots through brush (or even a single branch) reliably.

The bigger the round, the bigger the deflection was what happened. Which means the lighter the round, and faster as well, the less the round deflected.

Which actually sort of proved that the whole "brush gun" theory was backwards at best, but wrong in all reality.

Of course, after having seen that disproved while deer hunting, I had no doubts about the lie of the belief. I've seen bullets in the 30-06 and .44 calibers get deflected by an errant branch or by a group of branches making up a brush pile.

The only queston I have is, do you need a shorter barreled rifle because you still hunt, or do you stand hunt? If you do more stand hunting, go with a .270 or a 308. Well, with any of the more powerful rounds than a 30-30. You can accomplish the same task, and then some, with so many other better rounds out there than a 30-30.

The 30-30 is more of nostalgic hunting round today than the wildly popular hunting round it was in my Grandfather's hunting days. It was still quite popular in my Father's early hunting years as well.
Sfury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 04:15 PM   #14
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location:
Posts: 348
Default

the discussion was 30 30 verses 270 given that choice I would use a 270, Now on to the side bar of brush guns. A few years back (maybe 20 years or so) there was a big experiment on which gun made for the best brush gun, ie: shooting threw branches and bushes. The end result of the experiment was there is no such thing as brush buster, but they also said that there was no such thing as cover in regards to the 45 70
rjhans53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 04:34 PM   #15
Nontypical Buck
 
GRIZZLYMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas and Arkansas
Posts: 1,496
Default

Depends on where you hunt. I spent last week hunting part of the time with an old Rem.742 in 30-06 and part of the time with a Marlin 336. I have killed a lot of deer with both. I like the 336's light weight and pointing characteristics for times when I'm hunting in areas where I may have to shift from one direction to another, i.e. areas where the deer could come from anywhere. I like the 742 in areas where I have a pretty good idea of where they are coming from and may have a longer shot.

In the end, either cartridge, 270 or 30-30, will kill the deer. It is a matter of personal preference. If you are going to potentially hunt in an area where you might have a shot over 200 yards, I would go with the 270. If you go with the 30-30, look at the Hornady Leverevolution ammo. It turned my 40 year old 336 into a nail driver and does a lot of damage.
__________________
No matter where you go..there you are...
GRIZZLYMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 05:41 PM   #16
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western Nebraska
Posts: 3,387
Default

Depends on where you hunt?????...

I've hunted a lot of big woods....northern Minnesota and Wisconsin for starters and I've never found a place I'd have been better off with a 30-30 than a .270....never....there have been times I'd have been just as well armed with the 30-30 due to the density of woods and distance of shots presented and I have great love for the handy short barreled carbines that the 30-30 is usually chambered in .....but there are a few short barreled .270 and 30-06 rifles too that work as well...

I can say that if you did it with a 30-30 then you could have done it with a .270 as well.....but the converse cannot be said.....not even close!
Vapodog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 06:05 PM   #17
Giant Nontypical
 
Sheridan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
Default

"Though we disagree on some issues, I value your opinion and appreciate the discussion. " Gangly


I might delete my signature line & replace it with this statement.


I appreciate all of you !!!
__________________
Silence is Acceptance. "To stand in silence when they should be protesting makes cowards out of men." ~ Abraham Lincoln ~ Stand Up and Be Counted !

Last edited by Sheridan; 12-06-2011 at 06:09 PM.
Sheridan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 06:05 PM   #18
Nontypical Buck
 
Jeff Ovington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,818
Default

I shot my first buck with a 30-30..
Told that that no other caliber is responsible for more big game animals than the 30-30.. The 30-30 is also responsible for crippling more big game animals than any other caliber out there as well..
My choice would be the .308 Lever or .284Win 7mm-08Rem in a bolt..
They are all very very accurate calibers, efficient calibers, just as easy to maneuver in thick cover they and can cover distance out to 400 yards if needed..
__________________
DONATE BLOOD TODAY.....PLAY HOCKEY
Jeff Ovington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 07:32 PM   #19
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South East Pa.
Posts: 526
Default

Yeah, I would think medium round(.260,7mm-08,.308). If it comes down to either a .270 or 30.30 , I doubt if the guys in the coal regions would have ever heard of the .270 with out a certain gun writer pushing it. The .270 is O.K., but it is hardly the wonder round it is supposed to be. Somebody said about not needing a 30.30 lever action for a follow up shot. There are a lot of .270 pumps out there.
Gunplummer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 08:25 PM   #20
Nontypical Buck
 
Nomercy448's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kansas
Posts: 3,033
Default

I'll concede that momentum P = mass * velocity, however, your point is moot (says the professional engineer that paid attention in high school physics)...

Mathematically, yes, WEIGHT is the gravitational reference effect upon an object's mass. WEIGHT, from the mathematical sense, is considered W = M G, where M is mass and G is the gravitational field. Pounds, as reference to 7000grns per pound, is actually a WEIGHT measure, not a mass measure.

Since we live on earth, and aren't comparing how much a bullet weighs on earth to what it weighs on the moon, we see that W = M * 1, since the reference gravitation field on earth G = 1, therefore Weight on earth in pounds, or grains, is equal to it's mass, and therefore momentum = bullet weight times velocity.

Technically, when I use my analytical balance to "weigh" my bullets, I am actually MASSING them, not "weighing", since a balance measures the object against a reference mass, whereas a typical powder SCALE would simply be weighing the object. Not surprisingly, my analytical balance shows the same mass as the weight displayed on my powder scales. My balance will show the same MASS whether I'm on earth or on the moon, but my scales would not. But then again, I don't do much reloading on the moon.

On a side note, the traditional "doctor's scale" is a misnomer, because those cold white and black "scales" are actually BALANCES, not scales, using a complex of levers to MASS the patient against the sliding reference weights on the balance arm. Again, the BALANCE would show the same mass for the patient no matter what planet they were on. "Bathroom scales" indeed are sprung scales, and will show differing weights for different planets, based on their gravitational field.

But again, no, heavier is NOT better for "busting brush" as has been proven over and over again in the last decade. Higher momentum is better, and having a smaller diameter to reduce the likelihood of impact... Not "heavier"...

Last edited by Nomercy448; 12-06-2011 at 08:31 PM.
Nomercy448 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:13 PM.

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1