30-06 vs 308 question

Status
Not open for further replies.
Things with which I won't argue:

A stiffer receiver and barrel is generally more accurate in competition than a long action and possibly with a longer barrel.

The .308 was one of the first where a computer was used in its design. It was claimed by the design team that the .308 case is more efficient in its powder burn than the '06. Also, one aspect of their goal was a muzzle velocity about equal to the '06 and its 150-grain bullet, but with a barrel length of around 20".

The factory loads for the .308 are generally around 55,000 psi--at least they were still using psi when that cartridge first came on the market. The factory loads for the '06 used to be held to around 49,000 to 50,000 psi, except for the 110-grain loads which were at 55,000 psi. Allegedly, the lower number was for the more common usage of 150-grain bullets in the older rifles for hunting.

Now: It is known that with a 30" barrel and 230-grain VLD bullets, guys get MOA at 1,200 to 1,300 yards with an '06.

Chronographs show that the Federal Premium High Energy load in a 26" '06 with the Sierra 165-grain HPBT has a muzzle velocity of 3,150 ft/sec, as Federal claims on the box. I found it to be a sub-MOA load in my rifle.

In the FWIW department, my Ol' Pet '06, a Weatherby Mark V with a 26" barrel, has provided many and many a sub-MOA group, on out to 500 yards. That seems good enough for government work. :) Lots of cartridges out there which are quite comparable, but I doubt that they're any more useful.
 
Nate45... I never said I could win a NRA National Competition. Im just saying I dont believe a .308 is inherently more accurate than a 30-06. I dont really care what a .308 can do in a competition I just know what my 30-06 is capable of any given day. If Im shooting MOA or under its good enough for any shooting I do now or might in the future.
 
My saying 'at least 10% more accurate' was being kind. The .308 is in reality 2-3 times more accurate than the .30-06.
Click to expand...

I just cannot agree with this. Not even if you are talking about every rifle ever built in both calibers and boiling it all down to one statistic (which can't be done, anyway).

I will not disagree that overall, the principles and dimensions used in the .308 case make it easier to build accurate rifles, and I won't even argue if you say the .308 has an inherent or intrinsic edge in accuracy over the .30-06.

HOWEVER, trying to quantify that amount is simply bull. You can point to match records and say "see, smaller groups!" but all that shows is that the match shooters are doing better with their .308s. Not that the cartridge is 2-3 times more accurate.

Outside of a match rifle (and sometimes, even then) pick up any .308 and .30-06 hunting rifle and shoot them side by side. Either one might win the accuracy contest on any given day. One might be consistantly more accurate than the other, but flip a coin as to which one it will be. Rifle design, barrel construction, the fit relationship between bullet and bore, harmonics, triggers, and the shooters themselves all play a more significant part than whether the stamping on the barrel says .308 Win or .30-06 Sprngfld.

And, for the record, I own about half a dozen .308s, bolt, lever and semiauto. I don't currently own a .30-06. But I have. And I have shot enough of both to know that arguing about the accuracy of the cartridge alone is a waste of time.

Also I am sick and tired of hearing how the .308 won't "handle" heavy bullets. It will. And it will do it just fine, unless you, for some reason, think you need a 100-200fps higher velocity.

The biggest grizzly bear taken in the continetal US was killed with a .30-40 Krag (in 1901). And the .308 Win matches the speed of the Krag with 180 or 220gr bullets, and then some.

As the saying goes, "it ain't the arrow, its the Indian"
 
Bamashooter said:
Nate45... I never said I could win a NRA National Competition. Im just saying I dont believe a .308 is inherently more accurate than a 30-06. I dont really care what a .308 can do in a competition I just know what my 30-06 is capable of any given day. If Im shooting MOA or under its good enough for any shooting I do now or might in the future.
Click to expand...

Well, good that sounds more reasonable. Your last post sounded like you were getting ready to head into LuckyInKY territory. I wouldn't put out any open challenges on the internet, especially on a firearms forum about who, or what I can out shoot.

You know one time back in the late 80s, I had a Mauser Model 66 that had three barrels that came with it, a .270 Win, .30-06 and a 7x64. I worked up loads for each barrel that would shoot sub-MOA groups. And do you know what that proves in the whole scheme of things? Not much, lots of rifle barrels, chambered for lots of different cartridges will shoot sub-MOA groups.

The .30-06 and .308 are just rifle cartridges, no reason to invest too much of one's self into either one of them, they both are fine for hunting.
 
Look at what makes a good benchrest cartridge. Now look at the 30/06 and .308 and compare the shape of the cases. It shouldnt be hard to figure out why the .308 is more accurate. But as I stated a tenth of an inch or two shoudnt make a difference to most hunters.


PS The very best rifles will shoot 10 shots into less than 3" at 1000 yards.
 
44 AMP

If you look at the article I refer to, the author is saying the .308 Win is 2-3 times more accurate, on average, as a competition cartridge. Based on the average size of recorded shot groups.

At the peak of the .30-06's use as a competition cartridge, the most accurate rifles using it would shoot groups at 200 yards of about 2 inches, at 300 of about 3 inches. The 600-yard groups were 6 to 7 inches and at 1000 yards about 16 inches. As the high-scoring ring in targets was 3 inches at 200 and 300 yards, 12 inches at 600 and 20 inches at 1000, the top scores fired would have 90+ percent of the shots inside this V-ring.

Along came the 7.62mm NATO and its commercial version; the .308 Winchester. In the best rifles, 200 yard groups were about 3/4ths inch, at 300 about 1-1/2 inch. At 600 yards, groups were about 2-1/2 inch and at 1000 about 7 to 8 inches. It was not very long before the .30-06 round no longer won matches nor set any records; all it's records were broken by the .308 by a considerable margin. Some accuracy tests at 600 yards with the .308 produced test groups in the 1 to 2 inch range. These were 20 to 40 shot groups. No .30-06 has ever come close to shooting that well.

Accuracy Facts
.308 Winchester versus .30-06 Springfield​


No matter what any of us say, the group size aggregates speak for themselves.
 
Either of these calibers are more accurate than the shooter.
Click to expand...
This is my thoughts as well when we are talking good rifles. When I set out to buy my most recent deer rifle I had my mind made up for a savage 110 in .308 and when I got to the gunshop they had the rifle but only in .30-06 so I bought it. This rifle/cartridge combo is so accurate from a bench the very first time I fired it at 100 yards the first two holes on the target were touching and the third was darn near. I will never be this accurate in the field and I am willing to bet no hunter will ever be able to tell the difference in real world accuracy between the .308 and .30-06 in the field. To me either cartridge is a fine choice. I just cringe when I hear someone bragging about their new hunting rifle and how they chose a .308 because it's more accurate than a .30-06. And I do hear this from time to time!
I like the versitility of the .30-06 and the wide array of bullet choices and factory loadings that would serve for nearly any application in north america. The .308 has a decent selection as well and is very nice if you want to shoot on the cheap because you can get bulk ammo at great prices. And even though the .30-06 is a little more powerful, they both hit game like a sledgehammer on steroids and the game won't know the difference between the two. So even though on paper the .308 is more accurate, and on paper the .30-06 is more powerful, there isn't enough of a difference to actually make a difference. I really would be perfectly happy with either.
 
Last edited:
To me the accuracy comparison of the .308 Winchester and 30-06 Springfield is irrelevant when you talking about using them for hunting.. The average hunter will not benefit from any accuracy advantage the .308 might or might not have over the 30-06... A properly loaded 30-06 round in a modern action will propel a 180 grain pill faster than a .308, that point you cannot argue against.. This doesn't matter to me as I like my 180s traveling over 3200 FPS anyway :D

As for the 2-3 times more accurate statement..............

If I have two equivalent hunting rifles only separated by the fact that one is a short action (.308) and the other has a long action (.30-06) and both shoot 3/4 inch 5 shot groups at 100 yards.... How is the .308 more accurate???

One admission, my long range bragging rights rifle is a heavy barreled .308..... So its not as if I hate the .308... Just don't knock my beloved Ought Six!!!
 
Last edited:
The main advantage of the 30/06 is with bullets heavier than 180gr. Loading a 308 with 220gr rounds you have to seat the bullet too deep wich takes up case volume and velocity suffers.
Click to expand...

I believe that's correct. Especially for the handloader, the 30-06 is more versatile.
 
Length is very important in automatic weapon design. Yes automatic weapons were designed around the 30-06, but that was because the Army was not going to change its inventory of 30-06. That extra ½” of bolt throw translates to extra weight and higher bolt speeds. Those are things which can be and were reduced with shorter cartridges when the cartridge and weapon were designed in tandem.

As for Bart Bobbitt, he is still fighting wars that ended long ago. I don’t believe his numbers though I do believe the 308 is slightly more accurate than the 30-06. I shot 308 and 30-06 in highpower and in my hands I could not tell much of a difference group wise. However the 30-06 did kick more for the same velocity and I had to move more to get out of the way of the bolt. You do not want to break your position in rapid fire, the more movement the harder it is to get back into position.

I shoot higher scores with the M1a than my 30-06 Garand. The Garand kicks more, my M1a stock is better shaped, and I can use the box magazine as a palm rest in the standing position.

In the mid 70’s M1a’s became available to civilians, before then you shot Garands in 30-06 or 308. Older shooters would have piles of either brass depending on the caliber of the Garand they shot. After that, new shooters would be generating piles of 308 brass they shot in their M1a’s. I think that, plus the small disadvantages of shooting 30-06 in match rifles, is the reason the 30-06 faded from the highpower world.

Case design is something I have very little expertise. I do know the highpower world has moved onto other cartridges than the 308 and 30-06, except for F class tactical. Guys shooting the 6.5 Grendel, 6mm X, 6.5 08, 6.5 Creedmoore, are shooting groups that are well inside anything I do with a 308. The trend I have noticed is short fat cartridges , bullets with high ballistic coefficients and low recoil.

As for inaccuracy with the 30-06, I believe the additional air space is the greatest source of inaccuracy in the thing. The American Rifleman of the 60’s used to publish the yearly 600+ round targets the Army shot with the issue NM ammunition. The 308 always showed tighter groups and fewer outliers. They were using IMR 4895 in both cartridges which leaves an air space in the 30-06. It would be interesting to know if something like IMR 4350 in the 30-06, which would have eliminated the airspace, would have tightened up the 30-06 groups.

Anyone who claims they can see a difference on target in a hunting rifle is either a very bad shot, or the best shot in the Nation.

I have lots of 30-06's because it is a very good round.
 
Pound for pound. No I didn't miss that, I just don't know what that means, you go on to talk about shorter barrels so in my mind you are comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...

Maybe "ounce for ounce" would have been better wording, slappy, but all the same, I won't argue with you: you know you're right- your task is to convince the shooting world. Good luck with that.

Either of these calibers are more accurate than the shooter.
Click to expand...

The competition level in serious target shooting is such that any advantage is big.

Benchrest pretty much takes the shooter out of the equation, so that it is a competition between loads and equipment. I note that niether the .308 nor the -06 is winning any of these......
 
The theory of the 308 being more accurate then the 30-06 is misleading.

It comes from Service Rifle shooting where the M14 (308) started beating the records set by the Garand (30-06).

How do we explain that the Garand beat the service records set by the Springfield? Both use the '06.

Also the ARs (223) have beat the records set by the M14. Does that mean the 223 is more inherently accurate then the 308?

I don't think so. I think the rifle and ease of shooting the rifle.

Look at the scores required to get leg points in EIC matches over the years. The required scores were higher for the Garand then the M1903, and higher yet for the M14. Still higher again for the ARs. Some of my Leg Match scores fired with the M14 wouldn't have cut it if I was competing with todays ARs.

Some times my AR shoots better then my 308 or '06s at 1000, Sometimes my 308 is better, sometimes my '06 is better.

A quick example I can cut through the wind better with 190s out of a '06 better then I can with the 175s in my 308s. On a calm day I can do better with the 80s fired out of my AR. Its not the bullet as much is there is less fatigue with the little AR compared to the heavier 308 & '06s.

Also in some conditions I can do better with my 300 WM 1000 yard gun, but in calm weather I don't do so well with the 300 as I would the lighter rounds. (fatigue).

Don't buy the "Inherent Accurate" theory's.
 
Maybe "ounce for ounce" would have been better wording, slappy, but all the same, I won't argue with you: you know you're right- your task is to convince the shooting world. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...
Jimbob, again I don't know anything for certain about this subject, I have my thoughts but was trying to ask a question to which I still haven't gotten a decent answer, except maybe from Kraig. What I was getting at about the pound for pound thing is I don't understand what was meant by that. I said that I didn't honestly understand how a .308 could be more accurate than the 30-06 and the response was pound for pound a shorter action is stiffer. What does the weight have to do with it, I thought we were talking length? The sentence itself makes no sense to me. Sorry if I am just ignorant but, that is the way it is. and that sentence still doesn't make any sense.
 
What does the weight have to do with it, I thought we were talking length?
Click to expand...

Think about it: A longer action would have to be thinner than a shorter one of the same weight, would it not? Either that, or heavier, with the same thickness.

A stiffer action would flex less.

Same with barrels.
 
And think about it, the action is what 1" longer? I am sure they didn't feel the need to make it thinner to keep the weight down with that extra inch. Do you honestly believe that a 30-06 action flexes more than a .308? While I am thinking about it, what does the action have to do with accuracy anyway? the bullet is locked up inside the chamber when it is fired, not in the action.
 
While I am thinking about it, what does the action have to do with accuracy anyway? the bullet is locked up inside the chamber when it is fired, not in the action.
Click to expand...

..... continue that thought..... what is a free floated barrel attached to?
 
Hopefully it is attached to a fully pillared and bedded action that isn't going to flex much if at all. The barrel will flex, that is the purpose of free floating. But if your action is flexing I think maybe you are going to have a problem. Like eventually a cracked stock from the action flexing while it is solidly attached to the wood/glass bedding material. Why do you think it is always recommended that you pillar and bed the action all the way to the back side of the recoil lug and nothing in front of the lug?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top