D
Deleted member 48126
Guest
1200 yards is the comfortable distance. I have shot my .308 out to 1K as well. Both rounds are great for pinging steel well past 300 yards! Lol
Notes on the Centenerian
- Thread starter fiftybmg
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
1200 yards is the comfortable distance. I have shot my .308 out to 1K as well. Both rounds are great for pinging steel well past 300 yards! Lol
nicholasjohn
Well-Known Member
Thanks for bringing this up, Sir. I am also getting a bit weary of guys bashing this, that, and EACH OTHER. If a guy has had good success knocking down elk & deer with his .308 for the last couple of decades, the proper thing to do is to congratulate the guy - because he is a skilled hunter and shooter. If a guy has done the same with a 30-06 or a 7mm magnum, then kudos to him, too. They have obviously found the bullet/cartridge combination that floats their boat. Some guys like bullets that fragment; some prefer those that hold together and penetrate completely. Everybody likes what he likes for his own reasons, and that is his business and his alone. We all have our preferences, and some guys like trying new stuff as it hits the market. They're having fun doing it, and all the shooting they are doing is making them better shooters. Better compared to where they started out, but maybe not better than the other guy. Since I don't know how good a shooter ( or hunter ) any of these guys are, I don't compare myself to them. I think that we'd all enjoy this forum more if we showed each other a little more personal respect. We might also learn a few new tricks ……...
The 30-06 is a HAMMER with 180 pills. I won a 300WM MOD70 classic at a RMEF dinner and shot it some at the range looking for ammo that would group well. After about 150 rounds and reviewing load data from Speer manual early 90's I decided that the 300 was unpleasant to shoot during practice/sighting in/load development and I could get hand loaded 06 180's within 100/150 fps of factory MAG ammo. Ended up with 30-06 WIN MOD70 Classic SS that launched 180's at 2825fbs using book loads and getting 1-1.25 inch groups. Does 150/200fps matter? When trying to nail down Elk heck yeah every bit matters. Also 06 launches 165's faster than 308. Don't see that long action over short action matters that much, matters a heck of a lot less than 200fps difference. I hunted with 708 MODSeven REM for a few years and liked it fine, nice compact handy good to cary set up but now I hunt with 270WIN its just hard to not love 140grs @3000fps (708 won't do that). So like the 708 the 308 is great especially set in a nice compact MOD Seven REM. For me an 8lbs 30-06 or 270 delivering pills 200 fps faster for manageable recoil is "better" in my book.
nicholasjohn
Well-Known Member
I've shot lots of deer, elk, and a few antelope with the 30-06, .308 Win., and the 7mm Remington Magnum and I can't tell the difference between the three. Neither could the animals. If I was doing a lot of long range shooting, I might come to prefer the flatter trajectory of the 7mm, but out to about 400 yards or so, they all work about the same. I also used a 300 Weatherby once to shoot a deer at a little over 400 yards, and aside from noise & recoil, there was no difference. As mentioned in a prior post, deer aren't big enough for me to tell the difference in bullet & cartridge performance, and I think I need to shoot a few more elk to really iron out my preferences. I'll report on that in about fifteen years.
greenejc
Well-Known Member
Got out the popcorn, did you?
Top 3 rifle die sets being sold most years are 1. 223, 2. 308, 3. 30-06, that says it all. No super whiz bang new round that burns the throat out in 600 rounds, no long range can hit a target at 1500 yards shell, 2-50 year old and a 100 year old cartridges. But ammo and rifle companies would go broke if they didn't offer us bigger, better, faster every year. My 2 cents worth.
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
.308 can hit a target at 1500 yards with the right bullet.
I think that personal preference sometimes argues its own point to play down an advantage. Yes "only" 21 percent capacity. that is a little shy of 1/4 bigger. That is considerable Yes it is "old school" but old school is sometimes as good in some respects. Add that to brass availability and the fact that it will shoot a 150 grn bullet @3000 ft per sec. That is impressive. Yes, each step up is "only" 100-175 increase but I like increases such as that.Here we go again.
21% more powder doesn't automatically equal 21% greater performance...Anyone who's ever played around with cartridges or wildcats can tell you that. Cartridge design, burn rates, should angle, wall taper, burn column, all of these factor into performance. The .30-06 still does a great job at what it does, but it's just old school, and the design is old school. The whole entire reason we have the .308 Win (7.62x51 NATO) is because the military wanted a .30 caliber cartridge that would produce .30-06 Sprg. performance in a smaller, lighter, more compact package...And the .308 Win did just that. That's why it exists. "New" designed cartridges (like the Ackleys) are just a much better case design. Scientific facts. Does the old still work? Absolutely. But it's not up to par with the "new" designs when it comes down to burn characteristics and performance. If the old school case designs were so extraordinary, why does nobody still use them when they design their new cartridges...?
As for the 6.5CM, I'm pretty sure we all know where I stand on that one, and that I would not put it above the .308 or .30-06...Ever.
Also, I could see this thread getting really fun, really quickly. Can't wait for the festivities!!!
Always!
greenejc
Well-Known Member
Just so you'll know, I have, shoot, and reload for both the .308 Win and the 30-06 among other rifle calibers. I'm also retired infantry and was an armorer part of my career. I know quite a lot about both rounds.
The 30-06 was developed by Mr. Browning to meet or exceed the 8X57 Mauser's performance with a 150 grain spitzer. At that time, the Mauser cartridge had a MV of about 2700fps, and the -O6 duplicated that easily. It was designed with a tapered body and a 17degree shoulder for ease of feeding and extraction. Brass wasn't as good back in 1906, and Browning was already beginning work or automatic rifles and a machinegun in this cartridge, so feeding and extraction reliability was a must. Also, there were limited choices for smokeless powder with this cartridge. Performance was limited by available powders and powder burn rates. It was designed for a MAP of about 60,000 psi. (about 52,000 CUP.) The diameter at the shoulder is 0.441 and the shoulder angle is 17.5 degrees. This was done to facilitate extraction. You see this in the .308, too, with its 20 degree shoulder and a taper at the shoulder of 0.4539. The base of the rounds are the same at 0.4708 or so. Both cartridges are basically free from the chamber walls when they have been extracted one tenth of an inch, which greatly facilitates reliability in semi-automatic or full auto fire. The neck of the 30-06 was made longer than the original -03 cartridge to give the spitzer bullet better alignment with the rifle bore. Sometime around 1925, the Army brought out a new round, which had a 173-174 grain projectile at a nominal velocity of 2650 fps from a 24 inch barrel. All of this was with powders comparable to IMR 4895 in burn rate. This was also the preferred powder for the M2 Ball cartridge, which had a MV of 2800 fps with a 152 grain FMJ bullet from a 24 inch barrel. This is what the .308 winchester or 7.62 Nato was designed to match. The .308 did this by having a higher MAP than the 30-06 by around 2000 or 3000 psi. The -06 also had a reputation for less accuracy than the .308, but this is due to platforms and powders more than inherent accuracy. The M1 garand had to have a fast burning powder like H4895 or IMR 4895 in order to have the right pressures at the gas port. This gave the cartridge about a 70 percent fill when loaded to the proper pressures. Comparable charges in the .308 Winchester or 7.62 X51 Nato relult in about a 90 percent fill or better. Burn rates and velocities were more consistent in the .308 as a result. In my rifles, using IMR 4350, I get 5 shot groups that are less than 1" at 100 yards, so I think the -06 is more than accurate enough in a sporter barrel. (I have a rifle chambered for -06 in a heavy match barrel, and 5 shot groups are less than 1/2 inch with the same loads and bullets.)
However, that was the 1950's and this is 2019. There have been some very interesting advances in powders which change the paradigm for the two cartridges. For instance, Speer gives the maximum velocity of the 30-06 with the 200 grain Hotcor at 2670 fps using RL26. Hodgdon gives a max velocity of 2840 fps for the 180 grain Sierra GK at 2840 fps with Superperformance, and several other loads topping 2800 fps from a 24 inch barrel. This gives the 30-06 around 150 fps more velocity in heavier bullets over the .308, but more importantly, it gives it a 400 ftlb advantage in energy at impact. That can make a big difference on large bodied animals such as elk and moose. As to the 147 grain to 155 grain bullets, the 30-06 with modern powders can exceed 3,050 fps with several powders. It can also push the 165/168 grain bullets well over 2900 fps with several of the newer powders. That gives it a 200 fps advantage over the .308 in the same barrel length. I, personally, think that might possibly be a significant performance advantage.
The 30-06 was developed by Mr. Browning to meet or exceed the 8X57 Mauser's performance with a 150 grain spitzer. At that time, the Mauser cartridge had a MV of about 2700fps, and the -O6 duplicated that easily. It was designed with a tapered body and a 17degree shoulder for ease of feeding and extraction. Brass wasn't as good back in 1906, and Browning was already beginning work or automatic rifles and a machinegun in this cartridge, so feeding and extraction reliability was a must. Also, there were limited choices for smokeless powder with this cartridge. Performance was limited by available powders and powder burn rates. It was designed for a MAP of about 60,000 psi. (about 52,000 CUP.) The diameter at the shoulder is 0.441 and the shoulder angle is 17.5 degrees. This was done to facilitate extraction. You see this in the .308, too, with its 20 degree shoulder and a taper at the shoulder of 0.4539. The base of the rounds are the same at 0.4708 or so. Both cartridges are basically free from the chamber walls when they have been extracted one tenth of an inch, which greatly facilitates reliability in semi-automatic or full auto fire. The neck of the 30-06 was made longer than the original -03 cartridge to give the spitzer bullet better alignment with the rifle bore. Sometime around 1925, the Army brought out a new round, which had a 173-174 grain projectile at a nominal velocity of 2650 fps from a 24 inch barrel. All of this was with powders comparable to IMR 4895 in burn rate. This was also the preferred powder for the M2 Ball cartridge, which had a MV of 2800 fps with a 152 grain FMJ bullet from a 24 inch barrel. This is what the .308 winchester or 7.62 Nato was designed to match. The .308 did this by having a higher MAP than the 30-06 by around 2000 or 3000 psi. The -06 also had a reputation for less accuracy than the .308, but this is due to platforms and powders more than inherent accuracy. The M1 garand had to have a fast burning powder like H4895 or IMR 4895 in order to have the right pressures at the gas port. This gave the cartridge about a 70 percent fill when loaded to the proper pressures. Comparable charges in the .308 Winchester or 7.62 X51 Nato relult in about a 90 percent fill or better. Burn rates and velocities were more consistent in the .308 as a result. In my rifles, using IMR 4350, I get 5 shot groups that are less than 1" at 100 yards, so I think the -06 is more than accurate enough in a sporter barrel. (I have a rifle chambered for -06 in a heavy match barrel, and 5 shot groups are less than 1/2 inch with the same loads and bullets.)
However, that was the 1950's and this is 2019. There have been some very interesting advances in powders which change the paradigm for the two cartridges. For instance, Speer gives the maximum velocity of the 30-06 with the 200 grain Hotcor at 2670 fps using RL26. Hodgdon gives a max velocity of 2840 fps for the 180 grain Sierra GK at 2840 fps with Superperformance, and several other loads topping 2800 fps from a 24 inch barrel. This gives the 30-06 around 150 fps more velocity in heavier bullets over the .308, but more importantly, it gives it a 400 ftlb advantage in energy at impact. That can make a big difference on large bodied animals such as elk and moose. As to the 147 grain to 155 grain bullets, the 30-06 with modern powders can exceed 3,050 fps with several powders. It can also push the 165/168 grain bullets well over 2900 fps with several of the newer powders. That gives it a 200 fps advantage over the .308 in the same barrel length. I, personally, think that might possibly be a significant performance advantage.
greenejc
Well-Known Member
I use 70 grains of IMR 4350 behind a 180 grain Sierra Pro hunter or Gameking and group sizes are under 0.8 inches at 100 yards in my Remington ADL 300 winmag which I won at a NRA dinner in Lubbock, Texas in July of 1998.
Last edited:
greenejc
Well-Known Member
hh
You look a little funny in that gif, though. Really big ears.
greenejc
Well-Known Member
Same velocity, same bullet, no advantage. But why would you shoot a 30-06 180 grain bullet so slow? I'd at least push it to 2700fps. In my O3-A3, it would be going around 2770fps.
greenejc
Well-Known Member
The 270 is based on the 03-03 case. So is the 280. Its shoulder is slightly longer than the 30-06, and has a shorter neck. The 25-06 is based on the 30-06 without any modification except necking down to .257 caliber. I use .270 once fired casings to make 25-06 brass, and it requires a lot of trimming to get the case neck the right length. But they work very well, and I get them for free. My Ruger No 1 Varmint loves them.
