HuntingNet.com Forums

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Whitetail Deer Hunting (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/whitetail-deer-hunting-4/)

- - 30-30 Lmao (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/whitetail-deer-hunting/89708-30-30-lmao.html)

I've never used a 243 but I've killed all my bucks with a 30-30. I've never had one run one step after it was it. The buck I hit this year seriously died instantly as soon as the round hit him. I believe the 243 has a much longer range. I once read that the 30-30 range is 160 yards and probably that is stretching it. Where I hunt that is plenty of room. I hunt in the Florida swamps.
Chuck

Quote:

ORIGINAL: zrexpilot

Give me a brake ! The .243 has more velocity and eneregy at 500 yds than the 30-30 does at 200. The .243 will blast way bigger holes in deer than the .30-30, no matter what yardage. Not knocking the .30-30, I used one for years and want another, but it's not better.
People, there is no such thing as a brush gun, all bullets are deflected off branches or brush.

First, this is not meant to be confrontational. That said, in regards to the velocity and energy of a .243 at 500 yards, IMO that's an irrelevant statistic. According to my ballistics table, a 105 grain .243 zeroed in at even 200 yards will shoot 53.6 inches LOW at 500 yards. So anyone claiming to be shooting deer at that distance in my opinion has got more crap than a four story outhouse.

In regards to bullet deflection, it is true that all bullets will have some degree of deflection if contacting brush or branches, but a lighter smaller bullet will deflect more than a heavier larger bullet.

A .243 is definitely enough gun to take deer, but if it was a superior caliber for hunting deer more people would be hunting with it. In my neck of the woods, I don't know of anyone who hunts with a .243. Well, except my buddies ex-wife, but she was a little lady who was averse to recoil;)

Mr. .45-70

Quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr. .45-70

First, this is not meant to be confrontational. That said, in regards to the velocity and energy of a .243 at 500 yards, IMO that's an irrelevant statistic. According to my ballistics table, a 105 grain .243 zeroed in at even 200 yards will shoot 53.6 inches LOW at 500 yards. So anyone claiming to be shooting deer at that distance in my opinion has got more crap than a four story outhouse.

In regards to bullet deflection, it is true that all bullets will have some degree of deflection if contacting brush or branches, but a lighter smaller bullet will deflect more than a heavier larger bullet.

A .243 is definitely enough gun to take deer, but if it was a superior caliber for hunting deer more people would be hunting with it. In my neck of the woods, I don't know of anyone who hunts with a .243. Well, except my buddies ex-wife, but she was a little lady who was averse to recoil;)

Mr. .45-70

Wait a minute, no one even loads a 105 gr. bullet for the .243, second going by balistic tables and using two of the best bullets, in my opinion for the .243, the Federal 100 gr and 85 gr. hollow point. The 100 gr. sighted @ 200 yds has a 39.9 in. drop at 500 and the 85gr has a 32.8 in. drop. I wont even state what the 30-30 is.
What I was just trying to prove is the power of the .243 which is a lot more than the 30-30 thats it, not telling anyone to go shooting 500yds, just showing that the power at that range is equall to the 30-30 at 200. the 30-30 doesnt even have a 1000lbs enrgy @ 200 yds.
You know I have killed a lot of deer with the 30-30 and never lost one, nor have I lost one with the .243 either, but the .243 does a lot more damage and is just a lot better gun in my opinion.
The 30-30 is good for a 100 yds and thats it, it falls off the scale real quick after that.

Quote:

People, there is no such thing as a brush gun, all bullets are deflected off branches or brush.

I second this statement. The better brush caliber myth needs to go the way of the Dodo. All bullets can and will deflect on brush. How much in a given situation is more a matter of random chance than it is cartridge caliber and type.

As for the better of the two? I'll take a 243 every day of the week and twice on Sunday. A 243 will do everything a 30-30 will do plus shoot flatter and extend your effective killing range out to 300 yards or more. I'd hate to shoot at anything much farther than 150 yards with a 30-30. Although if you stay within that range a 30-30 will give good service. A 243 also doubles as a good varmit caliber as well.

Yes, 30-30's have probably killed more deer over time but even more large game animals have probably been killed worldwide in the age of the gun with black powder weapons. Does that mean that black powder guns are better than modern rifles? Or does it simply mean that like the 30-30 they have just been around longer?

I'll take the 30/30 anyday where I hunt. I wont deer hunt with my 243...although its fun to shoot crows with. Seen too many bullets do weird things when I used to carry that 243.

Can't say i know anyone here that hunts with either of the cals. Just about ever old farmer here owns an ol club 30/30 but have moved up to the 30/06 308 7mm 270 and 300, anyone i know hunts deer with one of the 5.

Quote:

what do all you people think.

First off, I think that if you start your conversations in face to face situations the same as you started this thread, You are going to get your plough cleaned by "Some old fool" sooner or later. Well, you ask me what I think:D

Beyond that, a rifle is like any other tool you may ever use, if you ask it to do something beyond its ability, you are going to be disapointed. If you are not qualified to use that tool, you are going to get inferior results. These arguments about which is the "BEST" caliber for anything have been around since the second rifle was built and will continue as long as there are people available with personal experience to argue them. This makes for interesting campfire conversation and great off season fare when there is little else going on to write about.

To throw another factor into the mix, game of all sizes have been taken successfully with calibers that are considered by most "experts" to be totally inadequate for that species but sometimes you just have to use what you have at hand, or end up hungry or dead. While I'm not advocating using a .30-30 for African Lions, it has been done (see the Last Ivory Hunter, the story of Wally Johnson; Peter Hathaway Capstick) as have Cape Buffalo with a .22 Hornet and Elephant with 6MM cartridges and smaller. Circumstances and your individual ability to shoot (bullet placement) whatever is at hand will determine your success more often than terminal velocity and ballistic tables.

Well let me say this ; This old fool has many years being around both of these guns. If i am out deer hunting and Momma Bear comes by i would much rather have a 30-30 on my lap than a 243. I have seen many bear taken with a 30-30 while hunting the mountains of Vermont and Maine. I'm not knocking the .243 , would like to have one someday. I like shooting woodchucks.

It seems like leftmehangin, has left this thread hanging.;)

First off I agree no such thing as a bush beater and if you use a gun/caliber on this premise or you believe it has less deflect your setting yourself up for let down at some point. In every debate the disclaimer we see thrown out is "as long as you put the bullet where it needs to be you'll have no problems". So keeping with that any deflect will not allow you to such a thing with 100% confidence and amount of deflect simply a variable that can not be controlled.

As to which one, they are both limiting choices for my biggame hunting requirements. I would however pick a 30/30 over .243 which would only be used in tight situations where I would rather have larger bullet for pentration than faster/flatter/lighter bullet in a small/light/handy rifle.