Which one would be a better round for combo "long range" shooting and deer hunting. As of yet I still don't reload. I think that the 30-06 might have more potential if I ever start reloading. But that will be down the road if ever. Is the 30-06 as accurate as the .308? I guess that would be my main question.
30-06 vs .308
- Thread starter 1911Ford
- Start date
1911Ford, the .308 MAY have and I say MAY a bit more inherent accuracy than the 06, but it would take an outstanding marksman to see the difference if he even could. Ballistically with bullets of 170 grains down there is not enough difference to talk about. If you go 180 grains up then the 30-06 wins hands down. The little difference in accuracy that the .308 MAY have can be negated in the different accuracy potential of different rifles. BOTH are top notch cartridges.
Chad Young
New member
Check out this article from http://www.snipercountry.com
*Begin quote:*
By Bart Bobbitt
Seems to me that any time there's more metal contacting the bullet, the greater [the] chance that more variables come into play. Besides, folks who shoot highpower rifles the most accurate[ly] have very little case neck tension on the bullet anyway.
It's really easier to have uniform case neck tension by having it light in the first place; neck length doesn't come into play when this is how it's done. And ammo that's been handloaded [which is] then let set for several weeks or months will have a greater release force needed with long necks because of dissimilar materials bonding between bullet jacket and case neck/fouling. There's more area to bond when longer necks are used.
All that aside, lets go back to when the .30-06 and .308 were the only cartridges allowed in NRA match rifle matches. Both cartridges were used in barrels of equal quality as well as the same action and stocks by several top shooters in the USA. Both cartridges were used in matches at ranges from 100 through 1000 yards. Many thousands of rounds were fired in both types. Bullets from 168 through 200 grains were used with several powder, case and primer combinations.
In comparing accuracy between the .308 and .30-06, folks who used each quickly agreed on one thing: .308s were two to three times more accurate than the .30-06. In the early 1960s, it was also observed that competitors with lower classifications using .308s were getting higher scores than higher classified folks using .30-06s; at all ranges. By the middle to late 1960s, all the top highpower shooters and virtually all the rest had switched to the .308. The Highpower Committee had received so many complaints of ties not being able to be broke between shooters using the .308 and shooting all their shots in the tie-breaking V-ring, something had to be done to resolve this issue. In 1966, the NRA cut in half the target scoring ring dimensions.
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.
At 1000 yards, where both the .30-06 and .308 were allowed in Palma matches, the .308 was the clear-cut most accurate of the two. If top shooters felt the .30-06 was a more accurate round, they would have used it - they didn't. In fact by the early 1970s, the scoring ring dimensions on the 800 - 1000 yard target were also cut in about half due to the accuracy of both the .308 Win. over the .30-06 and the .30-.338 over the .300 H&H when used in long range matches.
Most top highpower shooters feel the main reason the .308 is much more accurate than the .30-06 is its shorter, fatter case promotes more uniform and gentle push on the bullet due to a higher loading density (less air space) and a more easily uniformly ignitable powder charge.
Military arsenals who produced match and service ammo in both 7.62mm and 30 caliber have fired thousands of test rounds/groups with both. They also found out that with both ammo types, the smallest groups were with the 7.62 by about 50 to 60 percent. M1 rifles in 7.62 shot about twice as small of groups as .30 M1s at all ranges. When the M14 was first used, there were some .30-06 M1 rifles that would shoot more accurately. It took the service teams several years to perfect the methods of making M14s shoot well, but when they did, they shot as good as M1s in 7.62.
*****************
There will always be folks who claim the .30-06 is a more accurate cartridge. All I have to say to them is to properly test .308 vs. .30-06 and find out. Theory is nice to think about; facts determine the truth.
*End quote.*
Personally, I go with the .308.
*Begin quote:*
By Bart Bobbitt
Seems to me that any time there's more metal contacting the bullet, the greater [the] chance that more variables come into play. Besides, folks who shoot highpower rifles the most accurate[ly] have very little case neck tension on the bullet anyway.
It's really easier to have uniform case neck tension by having it light in the first place; neck length doesn't come into play when this is how it's done. And ammo that's been handloaded [which is] then let set for several weeks or months will have a greater release force needed with long necks because of dissimilar materials bonding between bullet jacket and case neck/fouling. There's more area to bond when longer necks are used.
All that aside, lets go back to when the .30-06 and .308 were the only cartridges allowed in NRA match rifle matches. Both cartridges were used in barrels of equal quality as well as the same action and stocks by several top shooters in the USA. Both cartridges were used in matches at ranges from 100 through 1000 yards. Many thousands of rounds were fired in both types. Bullets from 168 through 200 grains were used with several powder, case and primer combinations.
In comparing accuracy between the .308 and .30-06, folks who used each quickly agreed on one thing: .308s were two to three times more accurate than the .30-06. In the early 1960s, it was also observed that competitors with lower classifications using .308s were getting higher scores than higher classified folks using .30-06s; at all ranges. By the middle to late 1960s, all the top highpower shooters and virtually all the rest had switched to the .308. The Highpower Committee had received so many complaints of ties not being able to be broke between shooters using the .308 and shooting all their shots in the tie-breaking V-ring, something had to be done to resolve this issue. In 1966, the NRA cut in half the target scoring ring dimensions.
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.
At 1000 yards, where both the .30-06 and .308 were allowed in Palma matches, the .308 was the clear-cut most accurate of the two. If top shooters felt the .30-06 was a more accurate round, they would have used it - they didn't. In fact by the early 1970s, the scoring ring dimensions on the 800 - 1000 yard target were also cut in about half due to the accuracy of both the .308 Win. over the .30-06 and the .30-.338 over the .300 H&H when used in long range matches.
Most top highpower shooters feel the main reason the .308 is much more accurate than the .30-06 is its shorter, fatter case promotes more uniform and gentle push on the bullet due to a higher loading density (less air space) and a more easily uniformly ignitable powder charge.
Military arsenals who produced match and service ammo in both 7.62mm and 30 caliber have fired thousands of test rounds/groups with both. They also found out that with both ammo types, the smallest groups were with the 7.62 by about 50 to 60 percent. M1 rifles in 7.62 shot about twice as small of groups as .30 M1s at all ranges. When the M14 was first used, there were some .30-06 M1 rifles that would shoot more accurately. It took the service teams several years to perfect the methods of making M14s shoot well, but when they did, they shot as good as M1s in 7.62.
*****************
There will always be folks who claim the .30-06 is a more accurate cartridge. All I have to say to them is to properly test .308 vs. .30-06 and find out. Theory is nice to think about; facts determine the truth.
*End quote.*
Personally, I go with the .308.
Look at it this way Chad, today you go down to Wally Mart and get a 700 Rem, Ruger 77 or Win. 70. The odds are that ANY of them (unless its a lemon) om EITHER .308 or 30-06 with good ammo will shoot into 1" or less at 100 yards. Unless someone is the best rifle shot that ever set on this earth there is no pratical difference except in the length of the action, and even that in 99.999% of the cases is not a big factor either.
AS I did state the .308 may have an accuracy edge but to over 99% of riflemen the ability to use bullets over 180 grains which is where the 06 shines is more important than a possible a 1/4 inch at 100 yards.
AS I did state the .308 may have an accuracy edge but to over 99% of riflemen the ability to use bullets over 180 grains which is where the 06 shines is more important than a possible a 1/4 inch at 100 yards.
Tom Matiska
New member
If I can assume your use of "deer" to mean 165gr bullets or less, then you would do just as well to concern yourself with with barrel length. For a .308 one inch of barrel gives you about 40fps more in velocity, and the difference between the 3006 and 308 seldom amounts to two inches of barrel length.
If you were considering hunting game that required 200 or 220 gr bullets that would tip the scales toward the 3006.
Tom
If you were considering hunting game that required 200 or 220 gr bullets that would tip the scales toward the 3006.
Tom
Poodleshooter
New member
For me it's an easy choice. .308 Why? For me, it's cheaper to reload due to the lighter powder charges required for similar velocity and slightly cheaper military brass. I have no need to shoot bullets heavier than 200grs, so the extra capacity of the /06 is wasted on me.
According to most of my reloading manuals, the .308 cartridge is an inherently accurate design -- very accurate. That is why is has been adapted to other very successful calibers like the .243, the .260 Remington, and the 7mm-08 (my new favorite deer round).
Of course, the venerable "ought-6" has been adapted to some pretty successful calibers, too. It also is readily avialable in a number of factory loadings, and is probably more flexible in that regard. Factory ammo is available almost everywhere, too.
Personally, I've had an .06 in the rack for years. Funny thing is, it pretty much stays there. I just enjoy shooting the .08 offspring a whole lot more.
Of course, the venerable "ought-6" has been adapted to some pretty successful calibers, too. It also is readily avialable in a number of factory loadings, and is probably more flexible in that regard. Factory ammo is available almost everywhere, too.
Personally, I've had an .06 in the rack for years. Funny thing is, it pretty much stays there. I just enjoy shooting the .08 offspring a whole lot more.
I shoot both, though my most accurate rifle in either of the calibers is a .308, a Tikka. I do believe the .308 is a more accurate round, though you'll have to have a rifle that extracts all the potential of the cartridge to attain that accuracy. I guess that means that I'd come down on the side of the .308 for your stated purpose, I'm sure it'll take deer at ranges that you'll have trouble finding them, and it's a very accurate .30 caliber round for long range target shooting.
Well this is just my .02, but the difference between the .308 and 30-06 doesn't mean squat. First off, factory quoted figures do not jive with my personal chronograph results. I have seen .308 loads that were as fast as some 30-06 loads and some that were even a bit faster.
Second, who says the .308 won't handle the heavier bullets? That's baloney. According to Winchester's fact sheet, a
30-06 220 gr. bullet gives a velocity of 2410 FPS.
Using a Winchester Model 70, in .308 Win., I have chronographed 220 gr. Sierra round nose bullets at 2350 FPS from a 22 inch barrel. I don't give loads on the forums, but the powder was Winchester's W-760. Accuracy was surprisingly good at 3/8 inch. Barrel twist was 1 in 12. I have not yet tried the load in a 1 in 10 inch twist barrel yet, but pressure seemed within reasonable limits in the Winchester. Temperature was about 100 degrees on the day I shot those loads. It gets hot here in Southern AZ.
Back in the early 1900's, the 30-40 Krag with 220 gr. bullet was considered a better elk gun than the 30-06 due to bullet quality. The 220 gr. in the 06 did not hold together as well and resulted in poor penetration. The Krag at 2000 FPS did work better. Now it seems to me that if the Krag at 2000 FPS was adequate for elk, they why shouldn't the .308 at 2300 + FPS not work as well in areas where most shots would be at short range? (Try the Olympic Penninsula where 25 yards is a long shot in some places.)
Just because the "egg-spurts" in the gun rags say something won't work, doesn't mean their words are written in stone. I have found through personal experience that premium bullets, super long range magnum rifles, Oversized "Coke bottle" scopes ain't necessarily the way to go. I have found that the .308 is more than adequate for any hunting I plan on doing. Fact is, I'd rather sneak up on a buck, doe, bull or cow elk, than snipe him off at some extremely long range. That's the fun of hunting. After more than 40 years of hunting, shooting and reloading, I find the sneak more rewarding than the kill.
Paul B.
Second, who says the .308 won't handle the heavier bullets? That's baloney. According to Winchester's fact sheet, a
30-06 220 gr. bullet gives a velocity of 2410 FPS.
Using a Winchester Model 70, in .308 Win., I have chronographed 220 gr. Sierra round nose bullets at 2350 FPS from a 22 inch barrel. I don't give loads on the forums, but the powder was Winchester's W-760. Accuracy was surprisingly good at 3/8 inch. Barrel twist was 1 in 12. I have not yet tried the load in a 1 in 10 inch twist barrel yet, but pressure seemed within reasonable limits in the Winchester. Temperature was about 100 degrees on the day I shot those loads. It gets hot here in Southern AZ.
Back in the early 1900's, the 30-40 Krag with 220 gr. bullet was considered a better elk gun than the 30-06 due to bullet quality. The 220 gr. in the 06 did not hold together as well and resulted in poor penetration. The Krag at 2000 FPS did work better. Now it seems to me that if the Krag at 2000 FPS was adequate for elk, they why shouldn't the .308 at 2300 + FPS not work as well in areas where most shots would be at short range? (Try the Olympic Penninsula where 25 yards is a long shot in some places.)
Just because the "egg-spurts" in the gun rags say something won't work, doesn't mean their words are written in stone. I have found through personal experience that premium bullets, super long range magnum rifles, Oversized "Coke bottle" scopes ain't necessarily the way to go. I have found that the .308 is more than adequate for any hunting I plan on doing. Fact is, I'd rather sneak up on a buck, doe, bull or cow elk, than snipe him off at some extremely long range. That's the fun of hunting. After more than 40 years of hunting, shooting and reloading, I find the sneak more rewarding than the kill.
Paul B.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I don't argue with a lot of the comments above; made a lot of them myself. I do know that my 30-year old '06 shoots smaller groups than one MOA, although it's gettin' harder to put ten shots inside an inch than it was before trifocals--but I was a tad younger, then.
A buddy of mine came out with some kind of Remington 700 in 308. The fluted barrel had been cut to 20". He said it shot 1/2" groups, easily, at 100 yards.
I set up targets at 400 yards. We were plinking with Argentine ammo. I went and got my 26"-barrelled '06. With my time-tested 150-grain handloads, I held about one foot less elevation and one foot less windage than with his gun/ammo combination. Who knows? Maybe a 26"-barrelled .308 would have done the same. I've never seen a 26" barrel on a .308...
What I will say as strong belief, however, is that after shooting that rifle of mine for 30 years, I'm "married" to it. I can throw it to my shoulder like a shotgun and shoot as quickly, and kill things. With a rest, and a known distance out 250 to 500 yards, I figure I pretty much own whatever's out there.
I don't think it's the cartridge so much as 30 years with the same lil sweetiepie.
, Art
A buddy of mine came out with some kind of Remington 700 in 308. The fluted barrel had been cut to 20". He said it shot 1/2" groups, easily, at 100 yards.
I set up targets at 400 yards. We were plinking with Argentine ammo. I went and got my 26"-barrelled '06. With my time-tested 150-grain handloads, I held about one foot less elevation and one foot less windage than with his gun/ammo combination. Who knows? Maybe a 26"-barrelled .308 would have done the same. I've never seen a 26" barrel on a .308...
What I will say as strong belief, however, is that after shooting that rifle of mine for 30 years, I'm "married" to it. I can throw it to my shoulder like a shotgun and shoot as quickly, and kill things. With a rest, and a known distance out 250 to 500 yards, I figure I pretty much own whatever's out there.
I don't think it's the cartridge so much as 30 years with the same lil sweetiepie.
, ArtArt Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I don't argue with a lot of the comments above; made a lot of them myself. I do know that my 30-year old '06 shoots smaller groups than one MOA, although it's gettin' harder to put ten shots inside an inch than it was before trifocals--but I was a tad younger, then.
A buddy of mine came out with some kind of Remington 700 in 308. The fluted barrel had been cut to 20". He said it shot 1/2" groups, easily, at 100 yards.
I set up targets at 400 yards. We were plinking with Argentine ammo. I went and got my 26"-barrelled '06. With my time-tested 150-grain handloads, I held about one foot less elevation and one foot less windage than with his gun/ammo combination. Who knows? Maybe a 26"-barrelled .308 would have done the same. I've never seen a 26" barrel on a .308...
What I will say as strong belief, however, is that after shooting that rifle of mine for 30 years, I'm "married" to it. I can throw it to my shoulder like a shotgun and shoot as quickly, and kill things. With a rest, and a known distance out 250 to 500 yards, I figure I pretty much own whatever's out there.
I don't think it's the cartridge so much as 30 years with the same lil sweetiepie.
, Art
A buddy of mine came out with some kind of Remington 700 in 308. The fluted barrel had been cut to 20". He said it shot 1/2" groups, easily, at 100 yards.
I set up targets at 400 yards. We were plinking with Argentine ammo. I went and got my 26"-barrelled '06. With my time-tested 150-grain handloads, I held about one foot less elevation and one foot less windage than with his gun/ammo combination. Who knows? Maybe a 26"-barrelled .308 would have done the same. I've never seen a 26" barrel on a .308...
What I will say as strong belief, however, is that after shooting that rifle of mine for 30 years, I'm "married" to it. I can throw it to my shoulder like a shotgun and shoot as quickly, and kill things. With a rest, and a known distance out 250 to 500 yards, I figure I pretty much own whatever's out there.
I don't think it's the cartridge so much as 30 years with the same lil sweetiepie.
, ArtArt Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
More Stuff
Does anybody know for a fact: Is factory '06 still mostly loaded "down" to around 47,000 psi or CUP equivalent? At one time, it was--due to the existence of a lot of older rifles. The .308 sprang full-blown and new at 51,000 psi, said the Remington folks back when the .308 first came out. The only equivalent '06 loadings I've seen at that pressure-range was 110-grain.
Some of this "equality" stuff stems from them thar daze. It's also why handloads in '06 have performed better than factory '06 or than the .308.
A fella down in Australia emailed me that the Federal "High Energy" loadings in '06 are chronographing a 165-grain bullet through his 26" barrelled '06 at a bit over 3,000 ft/sec. I bought a box of their high-priced goodie, and it sez on the box, 3,000 ft/sec. Anybody else tried this stuff?
Art
Does anybody know for a fact: Is factory '06 still mostly loaded "down" to around 47,000 psi or CUP equivalent? At one time, it was--due to the existence of a lot of older rifles. The .308 sprang full-blown and new at 51,000 psi, said the Remington folks back when the .308 first came out. The only equivalent '06 loadings I've seen at that pressure-range was 110-grain.
Some of this "equality" stuff stems from them thar daze. It's also why handloads in '06 have performed better than factory '06 or than the .308.
A fella down in Australia emailed me that the Federal "High Energy" loadings in '06 are chronographing a 165-grain bullet through his 26" barrelled '06 at a bit over 3,000 ft/sec. I bought a box of their high-priced goodie, and it sez on the box, 3,000 ft/sec. Anybody else tried this stuff?
Art