The 94 can't do it all - ...

[Malamute]

"I personally have all kinds of rifles. I like em all. They all have their strengths and weaknesses.

But, If need dictated, I could do quite nicely with "just" a few 94's....."




Well said.

[Old Savage]

Mal - ah, to the numbers. Using the gospel of Hornady the 150 at 2300 (faster that some factory) 2.5 at 100 yds. drops 19.4". The 170 which many here find more accurate in their 30-30s at 2100 fps drops 32.2" at 300 yds. being 2.5 high at 100 yds. Now I would say that pretty closely conforms to what I said and is less optimistic than whatever gospel your numbers came from. In one case the bullet drops 16+ inches in the last 50 yds - basically the height of the chest. Too much chance for error that may break the leg not hit the heart lungs at that distance with a perfect shot but being off 50 yds in range estimation. Now with the 6mm bullet at 3000 (which is slower than what my BLR gets) the drop is 3.9" with the same 2.5" high at 100. So 19.4" to 32.2" versus 3.9" ??????????????????

[Poohgyrr]

"I will have to add Malamute's 9410 (and bird dogs ) to my list."
My 94 is a 30-30.

Ahh!! I reread that post, and see how I misread the 9410 part. Wondered a bit on that size cast ball in the .41 bore. Still adding your birdgun to my list though. Good shooting, and the dog(s) look good too.

[Malamute]

I certainly agree that the 243 in any configuration is a better longer range gun than the 30-30, but,....the Hornady 170 gr bullet is the absolute clunker of the ballistic coeficient world in 30 cal 170 gr bullets, about the only thing with a poorer bc would be a full wadcutter. The info I used was from a book that had the page titled "average ballistics" which I feel is a fair characterization since most other bullet makers figured out that they could build 30-30 170 gr bullets with a reasonable bc. I picked the 150 gr to compare because if someone was intending to shoot deer in more open country, it would be a little flatter shooting. So, to compare the .243 100 gr trajectory to the worst possible example of 30-30 bullets seemed unfair and inaccurate. Give it a little slack. We should at least use a "decent" performing 30-30 bullet to compare to give a fair picture.

[Old Savage]

Mal - I gave the range of bullets that I saw. Good question which bullet to use. Personally I would use what is most accurate in my rifle. It seems to do much better with one over another with the 170s doing the best. Different bullet companies use different systems of coming up with the BC and Hornady is just more conservative. There is no appreciable difference in one company's flat or round nose over another. There is a big differnce as you note between basic shapes. The problem is still bullets with velocities and shapes that produce bullet drops 10" to 16" over 50 yds. as opposed to say 4". The 30-30 can't enter that realm.

[Malamute]

Hornady may be more conservative in their bc calculations, but their bullet (170 gr) is much more blunt than the others on the market. I can see the difference when I shoot the different bullets at 300 yards or more plinking. I also sight in my 30-30 about 3" high at 100 yards, that gives a bit more usable range also. Not much, but a little. I'll take whatever is available.

I carry my 94 regularly, and figure if varmints gave my dogs a rough time, I'd have about 300 yards usable range, more if dire nessecity arose. I also carry other guns, but they simply arent as handy to carry. When I hunt for meat, I've used a scoped '06 or .338 mainly. The .375 H&H will get some woods time if my shoulder heals up enough by fall. Sometimes it isn't a matter of having a gun for what you're hunting, but what you may run into when hunting. In that line of thinking, I'd rather have a 30-30 in hand if I ran into a grizzly than a 243. Bullet weight and integrity, and penetration. In general, I try not to carry lighter caliber guns when up where the bears live. I'm going to work up a grouse load for the .348

[Old Savage]

Interesting, do you have an idea how much difference you have seen at long range with different bullets at 300 yds. What has worked the best for longer ranges? I have found the Win 170 PP and the Federal 170s have shot the best in my rifle. They will both give groups down to about 3/4" at 100 yds. The 150s I have used have never done as well more like 2 1/2" and it doesn't get along well with Silvertips.

06 and 338 - always thought they were excellent calibers.

[O.S.O.K.]

Old Savage, why are you picking on the 94? Especially, why are you cherry picking on it? A 94 big bore in .307 Win is the rifle/cartridge to compare your 88's to IMHO.

All you've succeeded in pointing out IMHO is that a .243 has superior long range balistics over the 30-30.... and so?

How does it compare to the .307 with the sleeker flat nosed bullets available? Or how about the 7mm Waters?

And really, if you want to make a better comparisson or better argument - I'd of selected the Savage 99 which has been availble in many more chamberings. But even so...

I think this thread got off to the side - the point is that the 94 is a viable do it all (with limitations - like all rifle/cartridges have) option. That is all - not that it is the best or better than all other options in specialized applications. In fact, it's a compromise in all but close cover woods type still hunting where it excells.

[Old Savage]

I agree with you; all of them are good considering the obvious limitations. 307s are pretty hard to find. So are the other BBs, 88s are expensive. 99s are a good choice. 7 Waters are very hard to find. 30-30s on the other hand are easy.

[Bullard4075]

Well.....it can and it has....from mice to elephants (170 gr. full patch).

Anyone got the story of someone shooting a Elephant with a 30 WCF ??

I'm not saying that it wasn't done , I just think it would make an interesting read.
After all Bell shot all those elephants with a 7mm Mauser.

[O.S.O.K.]

He also used a 256 Manlicher - AKA 6.5x54 which launched its 160 grain bullets at 2200 fps or so. But they were excellent penetrators - full metal jacket as mentoined. The .303 Brit with 215 fmj was also used - I wouldn't be surprised if most standard of the time rifles weren't used.

Heck I think Col. Wesson killed one with a .357 Mag when it first came out? Not sure if it was elephant or other big game. I know he took a brown bear with one!

[Malamute]

"After all Bell shot all those elephants with a 7mm Mauser."


I understand he also shot a lot with the 30-40 Krag with 220 gr FMJ bullets, and some with a 6.5 of some sort, likely a 6.5 MC.

-------------------------------------------------------------

I recall figuring that the Speer 170's had about 1/3 less drop than the Hornady 170's @ 300 yards with the same 100 yard zero. It's noticable shooting at the 18" steel plate @ 300 yards. A little higher hold to hit it.

[Old Savage]

Thanks I'll keep that in mind though even though I have over 635 rds through my 94 and have reloaded about half I have not been able to equal the accuracy of the factory Federals and Win PPs in 170.

If I were going to make the flattest shooting 94 for antelope I guess I would get a 7-30 or a 307 and use a light spitzer or boattail and make it a two shooter. Of course I would need to scope it as I just surely couldn't see well enough to work at long range.

[w30wcf]

No levergun can do everything (sewing, washing, etc. ) , BUTthe '94 is as close to perfection as there is!

w30wcf

[J Miller]

No levergun can do everything (sewing, washing, etc. ) , BUTthe '94 is as close to perfection as there is!

w30wcf

John,

You think you could post us a pic of your long range 94?

Joe

[w30wcf]

Joe,
I'll take a photo of it this weekend. I'll be at the Cast Bullet Silhouette Championship in Ridgway, PA then. Looking forward to it!

w30wcf

[J Miller]

Joe,
I'll take a photo of it this weekend. I'll be at the Cast Bullet Silhouette Championship in Ridgway, PA then. Looking forward to it!

w30wcf

Thanks.

Joe

[Scum Frog]

The way I look at it, other rifle / cartridge combination can start to dis the Win 94 when it has been in production longer than 100years. At that time I my listen. The Win 88 lasted 18 years. The only other lever that may have a chance in the argument is the Savage 99 IMO.

[243dave]

I've been watching this thread for a few days and thought I'd go ahead and give my opinion. To me a levergun is a tube fed repeating rifle, the 88's and blr's are more like a bolt gun, with the bolt handle underneath instead of the side of the bolt. I'm a fan of all rifles, even got one of them ar-15 things, and love it. When I'm in the woods I grab my 94 trapper in 45colt and out to 150yds am not handicapped in no way. When I climb a stand and watch across a field I grab my 300 with heavy barrel and 2lb. trigger and know I'm better off with it then ANY levergun made, but somehow it feels like shooting, not hunting. So does the 94 do it all ? It does for hunting, for the shooting I leave that for my bolts and ar's. Dave