Reading a Charles Alshiemer book and came to a section where he was talking about deer rifles and he stated that he felt the .30 .30 and I beleive the .35 remington cartridge wer poor choices deer. His arguement being that they didn't produce enough energy. I haven't had time to look at any ballistic charts and compare them to the each other and to other cartridges, but I used a .35 rem for years with terrific results. As a kid If I hit one or both of the shoulders, usually trying to angle into the lungs but broadside didn't matter, most deer I shot didn't even go 10 yards. So what is everyone opinion of the 30 30 and 35 rem. Enjoy, Juniorpc.

I don't know but i have seen plenty of 30.30's kill deer. I would guess this is just this guys opinion.

I got my first deer permit in 1956. I have used more rifles than I could ever remember since then. The 30-30 and 35 Remington are very good deer rifles for the purpose they were created for. They are a short range deer and even bigger game rifle at 100 to 175 yards. They have been made mostly in lever action rifles that are light and easy to carry. The 30-30 carries about 1100 lbs of ME at 200 yards and the 35 Rem would have another 400 lbs or so at the same range. Thats plenty of energy for deer hunting and even Elk with the 35 Remington. They were made to be easy to carry in a saddle scabbord and have served us well for around 100 years. If you can place your shot well and except the fact that these rifles real effective range is 200 yards or less then they will serve you well also. Many have shot animals at much greater range that that but the trajectory gets a little iffy past 200. There are better guns now but our fore fathers the mountain men would have given anything for thier performance in thier lifetime. Good Hunting

From an article by Chuck Hawks:

"The .30-30 is the great North American deer cartridge, and for good reason. It is a virtually ideal compromise between power and recoil. A 7.5 pound .30-30 rifle shooting the standard 150 grain factory load generates about 11.7 ft. lbs. of recoil energy. For comparison, a .30-06 rifle of the same weight shooting a 150 grain factory load generates about 21.7 ft. lbs. of recoil energy. Most hunters can shoot the .30-30 well, as its recoil is below the 20 ft. lb. upper limit for sustained use, and the 15 ft. lb. maximum most hunters can shoot comfortably."
"The .30-30 is just about perfect for hunting deer, antelope, and black bear at medium ranges. It will also take elk and caribou at moderate ranges, although there are better cartridges for the purpose. Even huge and/or dangerous game like moose, grizzly bear, and polar bear have fallen to the trusty .30-30, but it is not recommended for very large, dangerous, or thick skinned game."

Lots of folks on this board have a problem with the 30-30 saying why use when there are better rounds? In my opinion most of those guys hunt areas that aren't suited to a short lever gun so they put down the round just because they have no use for it. I still grab my 30-30 instead of bolt, scoped 308 when the planned hunt calls for it. Its light, quick, has more than enough power within its range limitations, and ammo can be found anywhere.

I guess that eight pointer I killed a couple of years ago should have read that book. One shot and he just fell over and gave up.

Taking nothing away from Mr. Alshiemer because he obviously makes more money than I do, but how would you like to have last name the same as a disease where you forget everything?

In some peoples minds if it does not say magnum behind it, it is not worthy of anything. I have seen deer shot by the .35 rem & 30-30 (shot one deer myself from a 30-30). The only one that traveled far was of fault of poor bullet performance. There has been numerous calibers that were desinged to retire the 30-30 but they have all been retired themselves. On paper the 30-30 does not look like it is worthy of much but it does the job. How could anybody question 100+ years of dead deer and full freezers???

Of course there are many calibers out there that will shoot flater, longer, and harder than the 30/30. And I own several of those that will. Most of the time if I am in the woods hunting deer I am toting the 30/30. If I'm going to be in a stand where I can see over a hundred yds. I'll use something else like a 30/06 or 270. My 30/30 Marlin 336 has killed oodles of deer. Even out to 200 yds. , I've been told that if your proficient enough you can still take a deer down with it. I don't know about that but I have taken one at 150 and several in the 80 to 100 yd. range. It's light enough , balanced just right for me, shoots where I point it, and it's just plain purty. Heck . . .I want some more of them. I own several , just in case something happens to mine and they quit making them or something. I would'nt part with one of them. Depending on where you hunt , in my experiance the 30/30 is a nice little meat getter. I'm looking at mine now and getting all fuzzy.

Who's Charles Alshiemer?? I'm not a big fan of the 30-30 but I do like the 35Rem. There are a lot of rounds that don't have flashy numbers but kill deer, bear and a host of other animals quickly and cleanly.

Love my 30-30! I can think of about 50-60 whitetails that didnt like it much though! Got it in 72. Have killed deer with 30-30, 30-06, 270, 7mm mag, 44 mag, flintlock, inline, recurve, compound and crossbow.

The 30-30 is my second choice right behind the compound. All the othersfight for a distant third place

The .30-30 and for that matter the .35 Remington are very fine woods guns.....more so for their carrying characteristics but never the less very capable of harvesting deer.

Yes, there's better choices.....but anyone hunting with a .30-30 or .
35 Rem is definitely not undergunned.