Ben,
It's really not that bad of a choice, the ballistics of the 7.62x39 and the .30-30 are very similar. And who knows how many deer the .30-30 has helped harvest!
But I wanted more proof to back up my claims, and found this article by Kim du Toit:
http://www.kimdutoit.com/ee/index.ph..._527_762x39mm/
Quote:
I’ve always thought that the venerable .30-30 Winchester cartridge (.30 WCF) was probably the best all-round forest cartridge for whacking Bambi. Indeed, its gentle recoil and outstanding ballistics make it the #1 choice for hunters all over the eastern United States each year, and the .30-30 has probably accounted for more venison steaks than any other cartridge out there, perhaps more than any two cartridges combined.
So is there another cartridge that behaves pretty much like the old .30-30—ie. has light recoil, but arrives with authority at close range?
Indeed.
How about the 7.62x39mm (aka. the 7.62mm Russian)?
Now wait a minute, Kim, you’re going to say, that’s an AK-47 or SKS cartridge, and not a hunting cartridge.
Is it? Let’s look at the numbers.
Using the same bullet weight (150gr. softpoint), we have the following data (from G&A ballistic tables, for factory ammo only):
At the muzzle—
7.62x39: 2200fps
.30-30: 2390fps
At 100 yards—
7.62x39: 1977fps
.30-30: 2018fps
At 200 yards—
7.62x39: 1769fps
.30-30: 1605fps
In other words, at less than 100 yards, the .30-30 is marginally better. For any shot further than 100 yards, the much-maligned 7.62x39mm has the edge over the .30-30. (A similar pattern, by the way, is true of the lighter 125gr. bullet.)
Now one of the reasons why the 7.62x39mm is so popular is that practice ammo is really, really cheap—7 cents per round, compared to around 45 cents for the cheapest .30-30 ammo.
|
As always, bullet placement is key.
He's better off shooting a rifle that he's comfortable with and can make a clean kill. There's no point in shooting a 7mm magnum, and then missing the kill -zone because he flinches so bad...