I know, I know the .35 Remington vs. .30-30 Winchester debate has been hashed over ad nauseum, but here's my particular dillema. A local gun shop has a J.C. Higgins model 45 chambered in .35 Remington. Birch stock, hardly a knick or blemish anywhere EXCEPT where somebody engraved a number right next to where the lever meets the stock. The engraving isn't sloppy, but it very obviously is not from the factory. There is no serial number stamped on the top of the tang (I think this is the right word), but I think that there are 5-6 characters stamped on the bottom of the tang. The barrel is not marked "micro-groove". When I peered in the muzzle, I counted 8 grooves, I think. So it looks like it has more than the standard number of Ballard grooves, but less than the typical number of micro-grooves. The receiver is drilled and tapped for both scope mounts and receiver mounts. Front sight is a brass bead, the back is a non-folding model. There is no cross bolt safety.
So, here's my question: Given the condition and peculiarities of the rifle, do I go for the .35, or do hold out for a non cross bolt safety Marlin 336 in .30-30? I know that reloading allows the .35 to be much more potent than factory loads, but I don't reload now and don't know if I ever will. If I'm just going to shoot factory loads, the .30-30 and .35 sound like they're practically identical in killing power for hunting black bears and whitetails. However, I can buy a dozen different loads for the .30-30, but I have to drive 50 minutes to even find a box of 200-grainers for the .35 Rem. Practically speaking, buying a .30-30 seems to make a whole lot more sense to me, 'cause it'll do everything the .35 will do, PLUS more range and less recoil. But there's just something about that model 45 on the rack that speaks to me. And, no, I can't afford to buy one of each. I'm way too poor for that.