357 Rossi or 30-30 Marlin brush gun?

[MBTcustom]

I have all the lever guns mentioned in this thread. I have a Marlin 30-30, a Rossi 92 in 44mag, and the Marlin 45-70. When it comes to a close shot in heavy brush, my 45-70 guide gun is the rifle I will have if I don't want to hunt with my M1A. The 45-70 Marlin is the only rifle that is in my top three most versitile and powerful rifles for the weight (and I'm a professional gunsmith so I have had hands on just about anything you can dream up).
That said, the Rossi 92 would be my second choice, and after I do an action/trigger job, a 92 is a lead slinging machine.
That said, I voted for the 30-30 in the pol, and I stand by that vote. A marlin 30-30 can be improved upon, but it can never be replaced as a mid range rifle that gets the job done that has an impressive lineup of molds available for it. If you already have the dies and molds, there's no way I would trade it up for a 357 92.
44mag?, maybe.
45-70?, definitely.

35 Remington? In a New York minute and without a second thought!!!!

[Lead Fred]

The m92 design is Soooo inferior to the 336 Marlin there is not comparison. The marlin will out last the Rossi.

Now on caliber. We ring the 200 yard gong with ease with FTX 30-30 rounds. Not so easy with the 44 mag, no where close with the 357.
The 30 cal is moving way faster than either of the pistol calibers mentioned. Energy transfer should show the same at distance.

45/70 is what I use for close in defense. My 1895 Marlin GG is my handgun. The destructive force is unmatched
On the taylor knock down chart a 22 rimfire is a 1, a 12 gauge shotgun 1oz slug at 10 feet is a 53 on the chart.

My 45/70 rounds are a 45 on the chart @ 100 yards.

Makes me feel damn safe

[RPRNY]

35 Remington.

Done.

[jmort]

"45/70 is what I use for close in defense. My 1895 Marlin GG is my handgun. The destructive force is unmatched
On the taylor knock down chart a 22 rimfire is a 1, a 12 gauge shotgun 1oz slug at 10 feet is a 53 on the chart.
My 45/70 rounds are a 45 on the chart @ 100 yards."

Where do people get this nonsense? So much crazy talk. It is not yet legal to marry your .45-70. A top of the line 12 gauge slug will have a Taylor Knock Out Value of 70 at 100 yards and 111 at the outset. The "destructive force," whatever that means, of the .45-70, is lesser, when compared to a serious shotgun slug.

[Lonegun1894]

I would say keep the Marlin, and buy the Rossi. Hunt with both for a year or three, and then decide. I have both, and been trying to decide which I like better for 5-6 years now. All I have figured out is that I like the Rossi .357 if shots are going to be inside 125-150 yards, and the Marlin .30-30 if shots are going to be inside 225 yds. Now most of my shots are well inside 100 yards, so I guess I will have to keep testing both til I decide. The Rossi is lighter to carry, it that is a concern for you, but the Marlin is easier to mount a scope on. Just get both if possible.

[taco650]

davidheart,

The 45-70 would be a better trade IMO than the Rossi 357. I know you said $$$'s are limited so whatever you do, be a good steward of your resources.

[mnewcomb59]

I really can't see why a classic "woods" caliber like the 30-30 needs to be passed over for cast bullet use. It's probably at least as suited for cast bullets at full power levels as the 357, has more power potential, increases its lead in power as the bullet goes dowrange, especially with LE ammo if you want to "cheat" and compare its potential with jacketed bullets.

Its long neck enables fairly heavy for caliber bullets that rival that heaviest the .357 carbine can put out. With lightweight cast bullets it can be loaded more cheaply than the .357 can....use a few grains of Bullseye and 32 Smith and Wesson Long pistol bullets that are readily available in several mould designs. Less lead than the .357 uses if desired. No more powder, either.

The throttle of the .30-30 can be adjusted from "meat saving" to "plenty adequate" with cast bullets.

If you want something "big bore" a pistol cartridge with its small case capacity doesn't seem to be it.

If you want a 45-70, I could see that far more than swapping a .357 carbine for a .30-30 carbine. That seems backward to me.

If you want different than a .308, a 45-70 is unquestionably it, getting its energies and effectiveness from big bullets. It's certainly nothing like .357 bullets that average out to be no heavier than .30-30 bullets and go slower.

The 357, especially the Rossi has a better twist rate for cast bullets. Marlin 30-30s have a twist rate fast enough for 240 grain bullets, AKA way too hard on softer, plain base lead. Once you're at a decent forwards velocity, you're putting so much rotational torque on the bullet that the front driving band is getting deformed and accuracy is going down, even if your gas check is stopping leading.

You will be working hard at working up loads with 50/50+2% with gas checks in the 30-30 to just barely get 2000 fps and hope to get a little accuracy and a little expansion. Winchester 30-30s are definitely cast bullet friendly, but not necessarily fast twist microgroove Marlins especially when compared to the Rossi 357.

Seriously, take a water dropped wheel weight lee 158 RF. Tumble lube it. Just over 1 inch groups at 100 yards for me up to 1900 fps using 17 grains of Lil Gun and PLAIN BASE. This is with still wind, discounting fliers, rested, etc. I'm no great rifle shot so that's about all the better I can ever shoot. 3" groups at a little over 2000 fps with 19 grains (Brian Pearce load data). I did have to shoot a few firelapping shots to smooth tooling marks, but even though the barrel still isn't perfect, it don't lead and it SHOOTS. This is just a quick visual sort of the bullets, no weighing.

Put 'er 3" high at 100, its dead on at 150, and 6" low at 200. At 200 yards, your 158 is still doing 1300 fps and I woudn't want to be in front of it. Someone said their 357 won't hit anything at 200 yards, well they're obviously using reduced loads or don't have their zero set up for max point blank range. Most likely they're zeroed at 25 or 50 yards and don't have any mid-range lob. Come on people, your forefathers lobbed 45-70s at 1300 fps at buffalo at 600 yards, why would a 2000 fps rifle not hit at 200 yards?

That 30" round ball twist really has a hand in this. the 357 Rossi won't shoot a 200 grain bullet, telling me these mid weight bullets are just about perfectly stabilized. In fact, a stability factor calculation shows 158s at 1000 fps as 1.5 - exactly enough rotation for stabilization. This means the bullet is deforming more front to back than side to side - aka the lube groove can pump, while the drive bands are holding tight due to low stress. http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmstab-5.1.cgi

The 30-30 with a 10" twist is putting more deforming stress on the drive bands than the lube groove. Taking a rough guess at 1.1 inches long for a 170, the 30-30 has a stability factor calculation of 3, meaning it is way over spun. This means you will need hard alloy and gas check for best accuracy, and middling accuracy with soft-enough-to-deform alloy and a gas check. No accuracy plain base anywhere close to full power. 32 special would be a much better small bore caliber.



What does it matter how big the case is? Smaller case is better (if same power) because more shots on deck in a lever gun.

Why would you think a 30-30 would be cheaper to shoot plinking bullets than 38 or 357? Bullets cost the same and can be had from 95 grains and up. The 30 30 case is bigger, so same weight bullet at same speed will take MORE powder and cost more. You're looking at at least 5-6 grains of powder for a plinker in 30-30, while 3.2 grains of powder is plinking in a 38. Then at the upper end, you need 30 grains of powder for 1600 foot pounds in the 30-30, but only 19 grains of powder for 1600 foot pounds in the 357.

If you want to push the 357, it will do everything a 30-30 can do, and it can probably do all the way up to 95% of a 30-30 with plain base. You will need gas checks and most likely settle for a less-than-max load with the 30-30 anyways, giving no power or range advantage, and a money disadvantage from gas checks and 1.5x the powder. Our OP already said its a less than 100 yard gun, so 30-30 aerodynamics and leverevolution doesn't matter. Besides, have you seen ACTUAL chrono results from LE ammo? 357 boutique has more foot pounds in 16 inch, same in a 20".

[LIMPINGJ]

Keep the Marlin and send it to Jess for a rebore to 38-55 or 375 Win. Less money than a new Rossi.

[.30-06 fan]

357 or consider the 44 magnum, they are also very frugal on powder.

[davidheart]

.....Our OP already said its a less than 100 yard gun, so 30-30 aerodynamics and leverevolution doesn't matter. Besides, have you seen ACTUAL chrono results from LE ammo? 357 boutique has more foot pounds in 16 inch, same in a 20".

Yep it's true. This gun I would take to a few hunting spots I know where a scope is annoying at best. <100 yard shots all around and the rare 150 yard shot if I'm sitting in one position and the odd black bear runs in front of me (happened this past year....). But 95% of the shots with this gun will be less than 100 yards and through dense brush.

I plan on it being strictly cast boolits. And there is a Marlin 35 Remington for $450... but it's micro-groove and as I understand micro-groove is a pain for cast boolits. They were in my 30-30 at least until I found a load that groups 1 inch at 100 yards.

The Henry 45-70 is a little over $600. Both are brand new. The .45-70 is much spoken about around here but rarely shot that I know of. I only know 3 people who shoot it and 1 is a friend of mine. (A friend who is hard to get a hold of so I doubt I'd be able to 'test fire' anytime in the next month or so) He owns 4 45-70's if I remember correctly.

I've never shot 35 Remington and I don't understand it's huge following although I've caught wind of it on these forums.

[jmort]

Since all the suggestions will work well, .357 mag, .30-30, .44 mag, .45-70, it really becomes a personal choice. I don't see a bad choice being suggested.

[davidheart]

Since all the suggestions will work well, .357 mag, .30-30, .44 mag, .45-70, it really becomes a personal choice. I don't see a bad choice being suggested.

But my deer have armor plating and large teeth.

[MaLar]

I have a B92 in 357 and love it.
It can be a serious hunting gun or the perfect plinker.
You can always find 357 brass, and bullets are easy and cheep to cast.
Have taken mine deer hunting with Speer 158 soft points.
I did a little experiment once. I friend and I shot into a bucket packed full of sand.
Laid the bucket on it's side and shot in to the bottom.
I used the Speer bullets my friend was using a 6mm Rem.

When we where done we dug the bullets from the sand.
My friends 6mm disintegrated in the sand didn't find but jacket bitts.
The Speer bullets penetrated almost through the bucket.
Came to a stop just inches from coming out and lost almost no weight.

I've bagged lots of Pine hens with it.

Would be the last rifle that leaves my possession.

[35remington]

Quite frankly I'll believe a Rossi averaging one inch at 100 when I see it and not before then. Given I was recently shooting 88 grain 32 long bullets at 1020 fps from a 308 with 3.5 grains Bullseye and a 30-30 will equal that speed with even less powder it's pretty evident a 30-30 can be shot just as cheaply as a 357 can. So stating was hardly an exaggeration.

While a cast shooting micro groove 30-30 is not an inch group shooter at 100 yards, for under 100 yard ranges a 2-3 inch rifle at 100 is vastly adequate for woods use. Wheelweights upset down to 1300 fps impact velocities and no great alchemy is required to attain such accuracy which is of a practical useful and attainable sort in a rifle that is currently owned. This very adequate level of accuracy will not require onerous load development.

If "big bore" characteristics are truly desired having a 357 attempt to fill the bill is coming up short in the "big" part of the equation. This is why another caliber substitution makes more sense than a .357.

If it is arguable whether something is a good swap for accomplishing one's aims.........it ain't. More oomph and separation from the 30-30 and 308 is the OP's stated goal and a 357 carbine doesn't do that.

Keep in mind this is just opinion and the fate of the world does not hang in the balance.

[Swede44mag]

A friend of mine shot two does last winter with his Ruger bolt action .357 mag I helped him clean and skin both they had been shot in the shoulder they both had a lot of blood shot meat and both were bang flops. I had a Browning lever action .357 years ago it was top eject I needed money to work on the house so I sold it. The Browning was a lot of fun.

[mnewcomb59]

Quite frankly I'll believe a Rossi averaging one inch at 100 when I see it and not before then. Given I was recently shooting 88 grain 32 long bullets at 1020 fps from a 308 with 3.5 grains Bullseye and a 30-30 will equal that speed with even less powder it's pretty evident a 30-30 can be shot just as cheaply as a 357 can. So stating was hardly an exaggeration.

While a cast shooting micro groove 30-30 is not an inch group shooter at 100 yards, for under 100 yard ranges a 2-3 inch rifle at 100 is vastly adequate for woods use. Wheelweights upset down to 1300 fps impact velocities and no great alchemy is required to attain such accuracy which is of a practical useful and attainable sort in a rifle that is currently owned. This very adequate level of accuracy will not require onerous load development.

If "big bore" characteristics are truly desired having a 357 attempt to fill the bill is coming up short in the "big" part of the equation. This is why another caliber substitution makes more sense than a .357.

If it is arguable whether something is a good swap for accomplishing one's aims.........it ain't. More oomph and separation from the 30-30 and 308 is the OP's stated goal and a 357 carbine doesn't do that.

Keep in mind this is just opinion and the fate of the world does not hang in the balance.

For some reason I still don't think you'll believe, but here's me tryin. I usually don't save targets or I would have more examples to show.


This spring I'm gonna work on the 18.6 grain load and 1 step higher and see if I can get them to tighten up with weight sorting, matched brass, you know all the tricks. That target shows vertical stringing, a common problem with scout scopes and their parallax issues. It was at the end of the day and I was getting a bit sore (yeah the 357 starts barking a bit up around 2000 fps) and a bit of eye strain and I must not have had the crosshairs perfectly centered in the scope, giving some parallax that caused the vertical stringing. 17.4 shoots just as good as 16.1.

This is just bulk handgun PLAIN BASE ammo. Lil gun meters great though, and I have seen multiple people getting SD of around 10 in rifle barrels, ES less than 30.

I did firelap about 20 shots, relieve the slight tight spot in the forearm that was pressing into the barrel (2 mins with some 220 grit), and I recrowned the muzzle after the rifle blew off the rifle stand at the range (really windy day) and landed smack dab on the muzzle on brushed concrete. If you can call that accurizing, this is a slightly accurized Rossi putting out respectable groups with $4/50 rounds bulk handgun ammo.

I'll write this here one more time. With the 30-30, you will NEED gas checks. And, you will probably settle for a less-than-max load anyways, giving no power or range advantage over 357, and a money disadvantage from gas checks and 1.5x the powder.

[35remington]

Thanks for the attempt. What really dispells doubt and makes an average look like an average is multiple small groups on the same target. Just my own perspective on the matter. I rarely see those, but if they were truly representative of what the gun would do they would be easy to make happen......multiple times on the same target.

I suppose the OP needs to define his desires and what is acceptable. At woods ranges a great deal of accuracy is not necessary. Given that a cartridge of lesser power than a .308 (30-30) seems to him to be going in the wrong direction my immediate thought is.....why does a .357 seem better as an alternative? If a 30-30 is somehow lacking at woods ranges a .357 carbine does not seem likely to make up for this perceived deficit.

[MT Chambers]

Despite what some amateur ballisticians on here say, stand the rounds or cases beside each other, easy to see that the 30/30 is in another league from the .357. Now the choice between the .30/30 and the .44 Mag. is a diff. argument.

[jmort]

Here we go again with the "logic" of more is more better. Professional ballisticians know that dead is dead. Really, anything short of the 700 Nitro Express is inadequate because if you put a .30-30 next to a 700 NE you can see they are in different leagues.

[mnewcomb59]

I'm amateur (or professional) enough to know that the same weight at the same speed is the same power. How complicated do you think it is lol?

I'm also amateur (or professional) enough to know that if I have a choice with same weight, same speed, but one bullet is bigger, I will take the bigger bullet for woods hunting.